Displacement: Which NT would have the best chance of winning the..

[Dark Savante]

World Cup if if they were resurrected 'as is' to the peak form they displayed over a campaign?

Vote and discuss.

I felt it best to leave it at former winners and runners up.

Hungary's Magical Magyars '54 (Consider a fully fit team)
Brazil '58
Brazil '62
England '66
Brazil '70
Holland '74
West Germany '74
Italy '82
Argentina '86
West Germany '90
Brazil '94
Italy '94

Remember we are talking about each team in at its very best, or using their peak season as the team we displace into a modern world cup. This one is probably a lot more doable for a team of the past without the need for modfication as it is a cup competition and is a few games in quick succession where form is essential. How do you think your selected team would do considering the rigours of the modern game and the rule changes?

[dror_khayat]

as for the NT,it's very hard to pick a winner.
look,the Hungary of the 50's and the Brazil 70' team,were perhaps the strongest national sides in history.they were the most impressive sides compered to their time.I mean,ther were'nt such national teams that were so strong and played so good football in their eras ,like those Hungary and Brazil sides.
but,is that means that one of those 2 giants would win a tournement in the modern era?it's a very difficult question.
they were greater than any team of the past 15 years or so,but I think that teams like Brazil 2002 or even 94' would beat them.and I'm sure you all know the certain reasons.
so,the best national sides were undoubtlly Hungary and Brazil of the past,but the winner of such a tournement would be one of the great sides of the modern era.

[glennaldo_sf]

If FIFA uses their new goal line technology than England'66 may have a few problems. ;)

[lanman]

Hungary '54

No doubt they would score goals, but the defence would concede. I'm thinking Newcastle under Keegan, but only even more attacking.

Brazil '58

Again like Hungary they would score goals and give teams major problems, but a team with a dominant midfield (4-5-1) could possibly take a grip on the game.

Brazil '62

See above but would be harder to control.

England '66

Solid throughout - would give most teams a game but ultimately lack top quality outside of Charlton and Moore.

Brazil '70

Possibly too attacking for the modern game but would always be dangerous and in with a shout.

Holland '74

A very good solid modern defensive side could probably hold out, possibly, maybe.

West Germany '74

Probably the most balanced side here, and Muller would score goals against any defence.

Italy '82

Would be good, but not good enough.

Argentina '86

Maradona would certainly be difficult to handle, but lack of top quality elsewhere would hurt.

West Germany '90

Strong at the back, strong in the middle, strong up front. Would give anyone a good game.

Brazil '94

They get my vote (slightly over Germany 90 and 74) due to having a better strike force.

Italy '94

Very difficult to score against and with Baggio on top form would always be in with a shout. Lack of a premier goal scorer would hurt though.


Any of these teams would be in with a great chance, but I feel the more recent the team, generally the more successful they would be. In particular the first three sides would suffer tactically, although there undoubted great players would still put them in with a chance against almost anyone.

[comme]

I am genuinely amazed at your selction of Brazil 94 lanman.

In my opinion they were pretty average, with the exception of Romario.

In my opinion he is the only player who could make a real case for inclusion in the current Brazil side, possibly Marcio Santos and Jorginho. Even then it would be a very slight improvement.

In my opinion Italy 1990 would be a very tough team to beat, I know they aren't an option. Given the increasingly tactical nature of the game, their defence was truly awesome and it would be very difficult to see anyone score against them (just as their contemporaries found).

[When Hell Unfreezes]

Brazil 70 were the best team ever, Engalnd were pretty hot too, much better than in '66, only Alf's amazing substitutions stopped the best Final you could imagine.......................IMHO ladies!

[Dark Savante]

I am genuinely amazed at your selction of Brazil 94 lanman.

In my opinion they were pretty average, with the exception of Romario.

In my opinion he is the only player who could make a real case for inclusion in the current Brazil side, possibly Marcio Santos and Jorginho. Even then it would be a very slight improvement.

In my opinion Italy 1990 would be a very tough team to beat, I know they aren't an option. Given the increasingly tactical nature of the game, their defence was truly awesome and it would be very difficult to see anyone score against them (just as their contemporaries found).
I'm amazed you'd say that about that Brazil side. I agree with lanman, they are team I will pick. I think you're being harsh calling them average sans Romario. They optimised themselves and played incredibly cunning football.

Marcio Santos, Aldiar, Dunga and Branco through the middle is nothing to sniff at and also the chemistry between Romario and Bebeto. I think that team would still stand up in todays game.

[comme]

I'm amazed you'd say that about that Brazil side. I agree with lanman, they are team I will pick. I think you're being harsh calling them average sans Romario. They optimised themselves and played incredibly cunning football.

Marcio Santos, Aldiar, Dunga and Branco through the middle is nothing to sniff at and also the chemistry between Romario and Bebeto. I think that team would still stand up in todays game.

They would stand up but they would not shine.

It was definitely not a vintage team, too workmanlike and uninspired.

Essentially they had a solid team, with excellent strikers. Rai was woeful at periods in the tournament, which was a real pity as he was excellent for Sao Paolo. They only really looked good against the Dutch, who were shorn of the best players from the previous era.

[Dark Savante]

They would stand up but they would not shine.

It was definitely not a vintage team, too workmanlike and uninspired.

Essentially they had a solid team, with excellent strikers. Rai was woeful at periods in the tournament, which was a real pity as he was excellent for Sao Paolo. They only really looked good against the Dutch, who were shorn of the best players from the previous era.
I'm thinking of the teams currently out there who will contest the next WC. I don't think any of them look particularly scary and I do think the bra '94 team could systematically destroy quite a few.

[comme]

Well they couldn't destroy the USA or Sweden all those years ago.

I think they would definitely be contenders, but I wouldn't fancy them to beat the current Brazil side.

[Rakim_22]

I would have to say Brasil 70. They had it all.

[comme]

Except for a top GK, left back, two centre back, d-mid and out and out goalscorer.

Other than that ...

[Rakim_22]

Except for a top GK, left back, two centre back, d-mid and out and out goalscorer.

Other than that ...

Lol... :o

[comme]

Lol... :o


That wasn't a put down btw, the Brazil 70 side was phenomenal. Biut if anything their weaknesses have only added to their mystique.

The cavalier nature of the football they played is what has won them so many admirers.

[Rakim_22]

That wasn't a put down btw, the Brazil 70 side was phenomenal. Biut if anything their weaknesses have only added to their mystique.

The cavalier nature of the football they played is what has won them so many admirers.

Oh ok good point.

[lanman]

I am genuinely amazed at your selction of Brazil 94 lanman

I just think that as a team they would be best suited to the modern game, and lets not forget they were unbeaten throughout 1994 and 1995. In a tournament I would much rather have the side least likely to lose than most likely to win if you see what I mean.
The choise was simple, not who was the best team (they would be one of the last selected if that was the case) but who would win a tournament and while Italy 94 would be harder to beat, their lack of a premier goalscorer really hurts them.

[scorpio81]

between hungary and holland for me

[ChaChaFut]

Netherlands 1974. Those players had to have a sense of self-sacrifice to be able to play the system they played. That team would have strenght (physically and mentally), lots of talent, and would be solid enough, line by line, to beat a lot of teams today, IMHO.

[Rakim_22]

Netherlands 1974. Those players had to have a sense of self-sacrifice to be able to play the system they played. That team would have strenght (physically and mentally), lots of talent, and would be solid enough, line by line, to beat a lot of teams today, IMHO.

Good points. They would be tough to beat.

[nicephoras]

Very surprised not to see Brazil of 82 here. If they play Italy 10 times, they win 8 games. Too bad Serginho had an awful tournament. For them at least - as an Italy fan, I think he was brilliant. ;)