Draft of Drafts

[tpmazembe]

Let’s go to tactics.

What tactical changes have occurred since 1960 that have truly changed the way the game is played? Formations come and go, and what is on paper doesn’t necessarily reflect how individual matches evolve [Teams like Arsenal purport to have only one out and out striker, at times two, but they rarely attack with less than 4 players].

To my mind the only thing that has materially changed, and noticeably, is the predominance of a more defensive minded philosophy; one in which overall team skill is sacrificed for defensive efficiency.

The greatest manifestation of this is not formations with fewer attackers -- 2 attackers vs. 3 or 4 mean very little in a fluid game -- but in the insistence of using specialized D-mid destroyers. This is a relatively new approach (relative meaning 15 years). Coaches have consciously removed a touch of quality to the midfield to add work rate / grit (comme’s term). Check it out…whenever one of these specialists can actually take men on, make incisive passes, support the attack, or poach the occasional goal he is considered a megastar (Keane, Vieira, Davids). The aforementioned are indeed great players, but I suggest that the modern teams are littered with D-mids who not complete football players.

I’d much rather have a midfield quartet that all have dominion over the ball, sacrificing some defensive grit in the process, because I believe over the long term they will win more than they would lose. Because we are in the midst of the draft I hesitate to give examples, but take the time to go through rosters of WC teams up until ’82 versus WC’s post ’94 and compare the midfields for skill level. View tapes of some of the club teams we always debate on these boards…check the technique.

In the past midfielders all did pretty much the same thing - link defense with offense. If you look at Ajax, Liverpool or any of the historically great teams (frankly any competent team) you would see that the midfield players were generalists (other than the classic 10 if a side played with one; today few play with such an animal, a topic for another day) able to equally disarm and launch attacks, as well have great touch on the ball. Defensive midfielders of today with those qualities are rare. The game is more specialized, with some positions having now been turned over to frankly very limited players in terms of ball skill – I’ll site Gattuso as an example (only because he’s a player everyone is familiar with).

In short, I don’t believe the tactics are better or worse, just different, with a more defensive emphasis requiring a different type of player. Not a better player.

If you look at the teams being built in this draft, notice how 90% of the players chosen are polyvalent and can play multiple positions/roles well. Again talent predominates.

[GunnersBT]

Wow! A kindred spirit! I thought I was the ony one with such an extreme view on this issue!

I'm almost always of the view that the best player in modern times is the best player ever. Just like Michael Jordan would take Bob Cousy to school, Pedro Martinez's fastball would make Babe Ruth look silly, and Tiger Wood would beat Ben Hogan by 20 strokes if they played on the same course.

I think Maradona would make most of todays defenders and defensive mids (except Davids -similar size, more stamina and strength) look stupid! With the lax laws on defending in the modern game Maradona would run riot in his origiinal OM position. He'd LOVE to have played in todays 'attackers are protected' world. He'd win sooooooo many free kicks and have so many players red or yellow carded in a season, lol.

I agree. I'm not sure whether I said that Maradona wouldn't be dominant in today's game, but if I did, that's not what I meant. I just don't think he'd be quite as dominant as he was in the 1980's.


This I have to contend with however. The most complete player of all time would easily find away around the brutes that play today. Pele is the uncontainable force imo. How do you shut out someone who always does the right thing? I mean, what good is speed against someone who will use it against you? etc, etc only way you're stopping Pele is by injuring him.

I'm not saying Pele couldn't play today. But physically, he'd have a tough time. The Pele that played in the 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's certainly wouldn't be dominant today as he was back then, and I don't think he'd be dominant at all. Of course, as Ombak alludes to in his post, all of my posts on this subject take into account the fact that Pele didn't have the technical advances in training that we have today. It's certainly not his fault; it's just a fact!

[GunnersBT]

Well, but if Pelé developed in this era, he'd be just as strong physically as any other player out there.

I couldn't agree more. Pele CERTAINLY had enough skill to be great in the modern game.

[tpmazembe]

Ivan Ramiro Cordoba or Jaap Stam would make even a young Pele look like a 40 year-old Valderrama.Maradona height 5’7” ~ 172cm
Pele height 5’7” ~ 172cm
Romario 5’6’’ ~ 170cm
Baggio is listed at 174cm.

Which one of these guys would win a foot race? Which one would you think had greatest vertical leap? Is there any correlation to when they played?

Moreover, given relative equality in size, would you say that none of them would succeed today? One of them is on his last leg and still distinguishes himself.


Two of them have done very well against Stam.


I terms of physical changes in players….other than conditioning there has not been a statistically significant change in the size of average player (unlike basketball for example where 6’10 guys are playing small forward -- but, unlike soccer, that is a game in which size trully matters). If you have a study to back your assertions that todays player are overwhelmingly more physically gifted then there 60-70-80s bretheren I welcome it. Bobby Moore was the same height as Cannavaro. Stam is no taller than Fachetti. And since the beginning of footballing time these tall defenders have trouble keeping up with smaller forwards with low centers of gravity.

Take another game of skill...doubt Willy Mays would be a star in baseball?

[GunnersBT]

Tpmazembe,

Since we're both posting at the same time, I'm not sure you've read my subsequent posts yet. In any case, I agree generally with your posts above. The problem is that all the things you outline above -- improved conditioning, improved nutrition techniques, and more defensive tactics in the modern game -- are all reasons why it is more difficult for a player to dominant today. Regarding your evaluation of heights, that's one very small aspect of a soccer player's physical ability. Far more important is quickness, and no, I don't think Pele was anywhere near as quick as Romario or Baggio in their respective primes. Quicker relative to other players of his generation? Absolutely! Quicker in objective terms? No way.

Last but not least: No, I don't think Willie Mays would dominate in modern times. And for what it's worth, I've heard Peter Gammons and Harold Reynolds say the exact same thing on Baseball Tonight....

[argentine soccer fan]

Maradona height 5’7” ~ 172cm
Pele height 5’7” ~ 172cm
Romario 5’6’’ ~ 170cm
Baggio is listed at 174cm.



The players I used as examples:

Pablo Aimar: Size: 5 foot 6, (168 cm) Weight: 138 lbs
Javier Saviola: Size: 5 foot 6, (168 cm) Weight: 132 lbs

If they can be stars in today's game, the whole argument of size is meaningless.

Besides, we can only imagine what players like Pele might look like if they had the physical training, dietary advice and medical treatments that today's players have.

Anyway, this is a never ending argument. Old timers in the 70's used to rave about the likes of Di Steffano and Puskas. We remember watching great ones like like Maradona and Platini. 30 years from now, young kids will be saying that players like Ronaldo and Zidane would not be able to make it in the game of their era, and fans like Gunners will be defending them. Then again, in 30 years time professional players might be giant genetically altered mutants for all we know.

Anyway, to get some perspective about how most knowleadgeable fans feel about this issue we have only to see the way this all-time draft is going.

[tpmazembe]

You are right we are typing at same time GunnersBT.

I think Mays would fit in as easily as he did before -- I haven't heard PG or Harold (I know him tangetially by the way...long story) -- pronoucements to contrary on BT. His technique at the plate would serve him just as well, and with the help of creatin and the like, he might be doing the same as his godson...while being a better fielder.

I know you said stuff for effect, but the 1960s is not the 1930s. His physical attributes were equal to those of today in most respects. If your point is that he wouldn't lord over the field like he did back then -- from your viewpoint -- I'll accept that. But you went further to claim he'd be no more than Landon Donavan (my interpretation).

We can agree to disagree.

PS - Pele went through batteries of tests when in his prime (including reflex, leaping ability from standing jump, 100 meters, etc.) I know the time posted on his 100, but am holding it as a trump card until someone can post the times of the defenders you have mentioned making him look like a 40 year old Valderamma :) He's easily the equal of Maradona and Baggio in that regard. Trust me.

[Dark Savante]

You are right we are typing at same time GunnersBT.

PS - Pele went through batteries of tests when in his prime (including reflex, leaping ability from standing jump, 100 meters, etc.) I know the time posted on his 100, but am holding it as a trump card until someone can post the times of the defenders you have mentioned making him look like a 40 year old Valderamma :) He's easily the equal of Maradona and Baggio in that regard. Trust me.

I'm surprised anyone is contesting Pele's physical ability to be honest. A short, squat player with poweful thighs and Olympian attributes, most surprising.

[GunnersBT]

You are right we are typing at same time GunnersBT.

I think Mays would fit in as easily as he did before -- I haven't heard PG or Harold (I know him tangetially by the way...long story) -- pronoucements to contrary on BT. His technique at the plate would serve him just as well, and with the help of creatin and the like, he might be doing the same as his godson...while being a better fielder.

I know you said stuff for effect, but the 1960s is not the 1930s. His physical attributes were equal to those of today in most respects. If your point is that he wouldn't lord over the field like he did back then -- from your viewpoint -- I'll accept that. But you went further to claim he'd be no more than Landon Donavan (my interpretation).

We can agree to disagree.

PS - Pele went through batteries of tests when in his prime (including reflex, leaping ability from standing jump, 100 meters, etc.) I know the time posted on his 100, but am holding it as a trump card until someone can post the times of the defenders you have mentioned making him look like a 40 year old Valderamma :) He's easily the equal of Maradona and Baggio in that regard. Trust me.

Fair enough. If I'm proven wrong about Pele's speed, so be it. It would unquestionably be an exception to the general rule. In any case, even if Pele's size and speed really do equate favorably with modern players, that certainly doesn't defeat my primary argument: i.e. Pele wouldn't be as dominant today because the AVERAGE player is physically superior to the average player 50 years ago. After all, I'm sure you won't argue that one of the reasons -- certainly not the only one, but definitely one of them -- that Pele was so dominant was b/c he was a superior athlete to virtually all of the players he was competing against.

In any case, this has been fun. :)

[GunnersBT]

I'm surprised anyone is contesting Pele's physical ability to be honest. A short, squat player with poweful thighs and Olympian attributes, most surprising.

Oh, come on. Haven't you ever heard of exaggerating for effect. :)

[Dark Savante]

Fair enough. If I'm proven wrong about Pele's speed, so be it. It would unquestionably be an exception to the general rule. In any case, even if Pele's size and speed really do equate favorably with modern players, that certainly doesn't defeat my primary argument: i.e. Pele wouldn't be as dominant today because the AVERAGE player is physically superior to the average player 50 years ago. After all, I'm sure you won't argue that one of the reasons -- certainly not the only one, but definitely one of them -- that Pele was so dominant was b/c he was a superior athlete to virtually all of the players he was competing against.

In any case, this has been fun. :)


Lol, I just have to interject with my thoughts on this issue. What set Pele apart from almost anyone else who has played the game is his mind! Also as I reffered to the fact he always did the correct thing in any given situation - how can you stop that?

You triple team him and he lays off exquisite passes into the space you've neglected.

You stand off him - He shoots...

You rush in - He dribbles past you.

You make a mistake - He exploits it regardless of the scenario. This is a guy that could out jump 6'3 defenders - outright. Not evven mentioning how he'd outsmart/manoveure them.

The list of intangibles is seemingly endless to me. I can't see how you can contain that?

[GunnersBT]

Lol, I just have to interject with my thoughts on this issue. What set Pele apart from almost anyone else who has played the game is his mind! Also as I reffered to the fact he always did the correct thing in any given situation - how can you stop that?

You triple team him and he lays off exquisite passes into the space you've neglected.

You stand off him - He shoots...

You rush in - He dribbles past you.

You make a mistake - He exploits it regardless of the scenario. This is a guy that could out jump 6'3 defenders - outright. Not evven mentioning how he'd outsmart/manoveure them.

The list of intangibles is seemingly endless to me. I can't see how you can contain that?

I couldn't. Well, actually, I could probably cover Pele now...he's like 72 now, right? ;)

[tpmazembe]

After all, I'm sure you won't argue that one of the reasons -- certainly not the only one, but definitely one of them -- that Pele was so dominant was b/c he was a superior athlete to virtually all of the players he was competing against.

In any case, this has been fun. :)Total package - physical, mental, and complete command of the fundamentals. And not least, consistency -- the greats do it over time and time again, not flashes of brilliance. The same can be said to varying degrees about each player in the draft so far. Distefano ability to read the game is legendary, and he did it over many years. DiStef also had command of all the fundamentals...its amazing how many current stars are so obviously lacking in some major departments (if only Ronaldo could head the ball -- but maybe that wouldn't be fair)

ASF has pointed out that many players today have no more physical gifts than those he had. Do you consider Zidane physically gifted? We know he is technically gifted, but is he any specimen....

I would argue that his greatest gift was mental (Dark beat me to it). Maradona, Zidane, etc.....the greats have a mental clarity about them that is only augmented by physical attributes. Maradona today said something to that effect about Ronaldinho Gaucho....saying that he thinks quicker than the average player. That is not decade specific.

Stay in the game GunnersBT, you've sparked good debate. We'll see who the next active player to be chosen will be.

cheers

[GunnersBT]

Total package - physical, mental, and complete command of the fundamentals. And not least, consistency -- the greats do it over time and time again, not flashes of brilliance. The same can be said to varying degrees about each player in the draft so far. Distefano ability to read the game is legendary, and he did it over many years. DiStef also had command of all the fundamentals...its amazing how many current stars are so obviously lacking in some major departments (if only Ronaldo could head the ball -- but maybe that wouldn't be fair)

ASF has pointed out that many players today have no more physical gifts than those he had. Do you consider Zidane physically gifted? We know he is technically gifted, but is he any specimen....

I would argue that his greatest gift was mental (Dark beat me to it). Maradona, Zidane, etc.....the greats have a mental clarity about them that is only augmented by physical attributes. Maradona today said something to that effect about Ronaldinho Gaucho....saying that he thinks quicker than the average player. That is not decade specific.

Stay in the game GunnersBT, you've sparked good debate. We'll see who the next active player to be chosen will be.

cheers

Ok, let me try this again: I AGREE with you about ALL of the above. The only thing I'm saying is that the AVERAGE soccer player today is more physically gifted than the AVERAGE soccer player 50 years ago. In addition, tactics have become more defensive. These 2 factors combine to make it more difficult for ANY player -- even Pele -- to dominate. That's the only point I was originally making...I just presented a whole bunch of other arguments to do it (...some of which I don't even necessarily agree with...sorry, I like playing devil's advocate). :)

[comme]

Sorry just to get back to Maldini for a moment. No-one could be a bigger fan of his than me, I rate him as perhaps the finest defender of all time. However, I have never yet argued to take him in this draft. For me left-back, and I hope you play him there as it is easily his best position, is one of the deepest positions of the draft. There are at least 5 great left-backs and while you have the best wingbacks you are still short in attack. Is that going to be a problem?

[Spartak]

Sorry just to get back to Maldini for a moment. No-one could be a bigger fan of his than me, I rate him as perhaps the finest defender of all time. However, I have never yet argued to take him in this draft. For me left-back, and I hope you play him there as it is easily his best position, is one of the deepest positions of the draft. There are at least 5 great left-backs and while you have the best wingbacks you are still short in attack. Is that going to be a problem?
There are still many attacking players that I would love to pick so we will have a good attack. Don't worry about that. But I think it's safe to say we will most likely have the best backline of all 5 teams. And we already have Cruyff to lead our attack. I think we are in great shape.

[Dark Savante]

Sorry just to get back to Maldini for a moment. No-one could be a bigger fan of his than me, I rate him as perhaps the finest defender of all time. However, I have never yet argued to take him in this draft. For me left-back, and I hope you play him there as it is easily his best position, is one of the deepest positions of the draft. There are at least 5 great left-backs and while you have the best wingbacks you are still short in attack. Is that going to be a problem?

I'd question that. There are two phenomenal LB's I think 1 has been taken and the other will be snapped up soon enough. After that the standard drops some and nobody else is a genuine lock in that position. Maldini doesn't have a fault in that position, he plays it to absolute perfection. After the first 2 questions can be asked.

The attacking area of the field is very different. Individualism and creativity can come in many guises and outside of those 5-10 commonly rated all timers personal favorites can be chosen and succeed easily. The defence is another story. You want control, organisation and studiousness from it and a lot less 'free thinking' in that sense I feel we have the best defence possible form a 4-4-2 considering we have the best two wingbacks ever. Of course, the 2nd centreback will be the determining factor in just how strong our defence will be in its final outcome, but we are well on the way to a solid team with a lot of awesome attacking choices still left in the draft I feel we are in a strong position.

[Mobile]

Sorry just to get back to Maldini for a moment. No-one could be a bigger fan of his than me, I rate him as perhaps the finest defender of all time. However, I have never yet argued to take him in this draft. For me left-back, and I hope you play him there as it is easily his best position, is one of the deepest positions of the draft. There are at least 5 great left-backs and while you have the best wingbacks you are still short in attack. Is that going to be a problem?

But Maldini is arguably the best left-back.

Don't worry, we have debated whether to strengthen our forward line. But there are still enough strikers and attacking midfielders out there for us to be happy with the choices we are left with.

[comme]

Don't get me wrong there are still loads of great attackers out there. However, if you want to play with wingers there are only really 2 great ones left.

As for left back, as I say I think maldini is the best. But I don't think the drop off is as great as in most positions.

As for 2 great ones you really have to be joking. Including Maldini and the person who i believe tp is referring to I think there are 5 great left backs and another 3 extremely good ones.

Our team discussed our dream team and out of 3 votes we had three different left backs, so we will not be worrying about that position. RB is another matter, you have the best, there are a couple of modern greats but beyond that the position is very open.

How good your defence really is will depend on your next CB and your goalie. One man stands out there, i just hope we get him.

[Dark Savante]

Don't get me wrong there are still loads of great attackers out there. However, if you want to play with wingers there are only really 2 great ones left..

Whoa...who said anything about wingers :)


As for left back, as I say I think maldini is the best. But I don't think the drop off is as great as in most positions..

You don't?


As for 2 great ones you really have to be joking. Including Maldini and the person who i believe tp is referring to I think there are 5 great left backs and another 3 extremely good ones.

Our team discussed our dream team and out of 3 votes we had three different left backs, so we will not be worrying about that position. RB is another matter, you have the best, there are a couple of modern greats but beyond that the position is very open..
We'll see what the group thinks as whole on this one.


How good your defence really is will depend on your next CB and your goalie. One man stands out there, i just hope we get him.

Yup.