Do we produce legends any more?

[comme]

About a year ago I started a thread asking whether the game of football was in terminal decline.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=618952&highlight=terminal

Although I was largely playing Devil's Advocate, the thrust of the question centred around why there are so few perceived all-time greats who have played the game in recent years.

A few days ago I was going though an issue of World Soccer from October 1983 and found an interesting article. Eric Batty, one of the original journalists for World Soccer produced an annual World XI, and in this issue he had received a letter from a reader setting out his own all-time XI. In response Batty wrote the following article.

"So now to my personal opinions, and I must say that I have found it an extremely difficult task. It is not hard to name a string of great players and I can easily spark off arguments. For instance in this order, the three greatest players I ever saw were: 1. Alfredo Di Stefano 2. Ferenc Puskas 3. Pele.

I know that will shock a lot of readers, but in my view it is the great men who play for the team who are truly great, and Pele was a fantastic individual with incredible skills. But with all his talents, he could never have organised the 1958 or 1962 World Cup winning teams the way that Didi did. That requires different qualities.

Looking back, especially from the pretty grim days of 1983, I am convinced that the real “golden days” of football were the 1950s. At that time it really was the players who mattered, but today it is all tactics, workrate, getting stuck in and high crosses, and that that was never my cup of tea. On this theme, I can think of only two players who can bear comparison with the stars of the fifties- Frank Beckenbauer and Gunter Nutzer, both of course, West Germans who seemed to be able to produce great players at will, but now it is clear that their supply is drying up. So to my team, for which I make no apologies:

-------------------------------Lev Yashin

Victor Andrade--Obdulio Varela—Ernst Ocwirk—Gerhard Hanappi

------------------Raymond Kopa-----------Juan Schiaffino

Stanley Matthews------Pele----Alfredo Di Stefano—--Ferenc Puskas

And I too have named some reserves the most prominent of which are:

Djalma Santos, Didi, Ladislao Kubala, Bernard Vukas, Gunnar Gren, Gunnar Nordahl, Nandor Hidegkuti, and Fritz Walter.

Let me add that if we had such players today there would be no worries about clubs going broke and headlines about falling attendances. "

FYI the reader's selected squad was:

------------------------------Gordon Banks

Djalma Santos—Bobby Moore—Franz Beckenbauer—Giacinto Facchetti

-------------Johan Cruyff—Bobby Charlton—Diego Maradona

------------------George Best—Alfredo Di Stefano—Pele

Reserves: Lev Yashin, Ruud Krol, Eusebio, Ferenc Puskas, Garrincha

So what startled me about this article is that in 1983 at a time when Maradona, Zico, Platini, Rummenigge, Dalgish, Pasarella, Zoff, Scirea, Falcao, Socrates etc were all in their pomp, a man who had witnessed decades of the game believed that it was in terminal decline and that the physicality of the game was destroying it.

Is this not the situation we find ourselves in today? We bemoan the loss of the artists at the expense of cloggers and workhorses? That tactics have got in the way of the the game?

So to pose the question again, are the players of today actually any worse than those of 20 or 50 years ago, or is it all just a matter of perception?

[Leeds92]

Its a good point that you make about the journo not mentioning the likes of Maradona & co, although Maradona hadnt single handedly won the world cup by this time.

There was another thread awhile ago about Zidane being an all time great. One of the points that I made at the time was that he had not revolutionised the game the way Pele, Cruyff, Maradona, etc had.

I think that as the world has become a smaller place, the talent pool has become bigger. When you think about it I think that we do take players for granted these day. Having said that not one player steps out as head and shoulders above all others.

In some respects there are probably at least 10 players in the world today who would have been regarded as legends 30 years ago.

Who knows in 20 years from now we will most likely be arguing that Zidane was greater than the best player at the time.....

[johan neeskens]

Football's become much more of a team sport. Even the likes of Maradona would have to carry out his defensive tasks in modern football. That obviously gets in the way of legend making.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

I think it merely highlights that nostalgic views of the past prevent most people from objectively rating the present. Even if you have little firsthand experience of the past you are still brought up in a time when the doctrine states the past is always best and nothing compares.

[uamiranda]

IMO, it's hard to say a player is a legend while he's still in activity. I think the question is, without comparing epochs, what makes a player a legendary one?

[Perú FC]

I think it merely highlights that nostalgic views of the past prevent most people from objectively rating the present. Even if you have little firsthand experience of the past you are still brought up in a time when the doctrine states the past is always best and nothing compares.
I'm definitely agree, the time is the best factor to produce a "legend" finally.

[OrlandoEngelaar]

Ask this question, which fairly recent player are you going to remember decades from now? I say Zidane.

[Kevin8833]

Zidane and Schmeichel, Roberto Carlos possibly, maybe Messi.

[Moishe]

The real question which has already been asked is what makes a legend? I do agree that nostalgia does play a bit part but in truth how many players truly revolutionized the game in the past 20 years? It definitely will be interesting to look back down the road much like we do now with the past.

[Antonio81]

We may be past the point were anything new (of significance) can be added to the game. There are only so many tactical formations a coach can use, and only so many feints and dummies a player can pull off.

[Excape Goat]

The year 1983 might have something to do with it. Let's see what happened in 1983:

Brazil 1982 was the pinnacle of beautifull football. The Italy-Brazil game was still fresh. I did not know much about Brazil between 1982 & 1986. So I assumed that the world was still in mouning.

The great Dutch teams of 1970's were gone, and before the arrival of MVB, Gullit, Koeman. Who was the famous Dutchmen in 1983? Arnold Mühren and Willy van de Kerkhof? The most attractive NT of the 1970's was gone.

It depended on when the article was written. Maradona's career could be in jeopardy after Andoni Goikoetxea's tackle late in 1983. Anyway, Maradona was labelled by most after his first season with Barcelona as "overrated" in 1983. He suffered from hepatitis around that time.

Germany? I recalled correctly that the Euro 1980 team was aging.

Serie A re-opened its door on foreign players in 1982. That must be some excitement. Juventus was the team to beat in 1983.

He probably knew about the Danes, but he was unlikely to realize how good and exciting they would become in a few years. It really depended whether Denmark had qualified for Euro 1984 and Denmark suddenly emerged from the backwater. The same applied to France. We don't know how good they would become.

[Perú FC]

Ask this question, which fairly recent player are you going to remember decades from now? I say Zidane.
Zidane, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Roberto Carlos... Romário, Maldini, Schmeichel...

[Big Soccer Member]

The real question which has already been asked is what makes a legend? I do agree that nostalgia does play a bit part but in truth how many players truly revolutionized the game in the past 20 years? It definitely will be interesting to look back down the road much like we do now with the past.
Why does revolutionising the game make a legend> That would make the Belgian, Bosman, among the bets players ever. Maldini hasn't done anything revolutionary, but he is certainly a world football legend. Same with Messi or (Brazilian Ronaldo). Neither revolutionary, but both extremely talented, both legends in 2o years, for me.

[Moishe]

Why does revolutionising the game make a legend> That would make the Belgian, Bosman, among the bets players ever. Maldini hasn't done anything revolutionary, but he is certainly a world football legend. Same with Messi or (Brazilian Ronaldo). Neither revolutionary, but both extremely talented, both legends in 2o years, for me.

Since when does legend exclusively mean best? Those that introduced something new to the game be it a technique, feat or rule will always be remembered for and associated with that. So yes the Belgian Marc Bosman in a sense is a legend. His name being associated with the Bosman Ruling pretty much guarantees that his name will live forever.

I'm sure you are right about Messi and R9, people will remember them. R9 for his amazing pre-injury form and Messi for now and what he may or may not do but does just remembering mean legendary?

[phil80]

Zidane, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Roberto Carlos... Romário, Maldini, Schmeichel...
That's pretty much who I think will be looked at as legends. some of the things these players did were just mind-boggling especially the consistency in which they did it during their prime. As for the current batch, Messi is probably the only one with clear potential.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

but does just remembering mean legendary?

Considering some of the players I have seen nominated thus far I would say no. However we are not simply here to list and argue about player selection.

[Seaside Mafia]

We may be past the point were anything new (of significance) can be added to the game. There are only so many tactical formations a coach can use, and only so many feints and dummies a player can pull off.

Maybe there's a cyclical element to the game. I recall seeing some 1930s and 1940s footage of Argentinian league football and was surprised at the skill level. Some of the tricks being executed then are seen regulalry today (e.g. lollypops) , but I don't recall them too much in the 70s and 80s.

So maybe, like music, genuinely new movements are rare. Most of what we see has been preceded in the past, but so many years earlier that not many remember.

Or maybe not, like.

[Juanele]

Ask this question, which fairly recent player are you going to remember decades from now? I say Zidane.

Ronaldo

The best player I have ever seen (actually seen play, not through reruns on tv).

[Manolo]

Great thread.

Actually this question came up in my head recently with one of the other threads in this board asking who is the Player of the Decade for the 2000's. And although I hadn't really given it much thought, since it is 2009, it is an interesting question to ask. Then I looked at the list provided in the poll question and was shocked that I didn't really consider any of those guys the quality that I would expect in a once-in-a-generation type player (granted, I still have some reservations about who exactly should qualify on that list, such as Zidane and Rivaldo, who were sort of late 90's, early 2000's greats).

I guess there are a couple factors at play that distort our perspectives, as well as a few real objective facts that may actually result in the game producing less superlative individual players.

People do tend to place a higher value on the past, for nostalgic and other reasons. Similar to musical preferences, people tend to identify and relate to the great performers of their own early years, and as new trends arrive, you already have a benchmark against which you rate the newcomers, which is difficult to surpass.

On the other hand, it may be true that more legends were produced before than now. To be a legend, a player must stand out consistently from his contemporaries, for a number of years. As noted earlier, it's more difficult to do that today because of the widespread emphasis on tactical development. At the professional level, football teams are like highly-managed corporations where, for the most part, each player performs a functional role intended to make the team better than the sum of its parts, and also to reduce the reliance on moments of individual brilliance. It's a necessity as much as a perversion, because players don't really stay on teams very long, and short-term results are valued because of tremendous fan and media pressure.

In a way, this can be compared to the invention of technologies. In earlier decades/centuries, new inventions such as the telephone, the light bulb, the steam engine, etc. were the product of individually brilliant men expending a lifetime of effort and genius. More recent inventions - television, the internet, cell phones - are not credited to individuals, but developed by organizations using collective efforts and division of labor. I think something similar is happening in football, for better or for worse, there is less of a reliance on individual brilliance for teams to win championships, and more emphasis on tactical organization. As a result, teams today are comprised of more workers and less artists.

[kingkong1]

I think it merely highlights that nostalgic views of the past prevent most people from objectively rating the present. Even if you have little firsthand experience of the past you are still brought up in a time when the doctrine states the past is always best and nothing compares.There is no how to talk about 'legends' without talking about past.

There are no 'present' legends (which we know for sure will last).

One doesn't 'produce' legends like daily bread (what only enhances the inherent contradiction of the thread's title).

Daily bread itself only lasts up to 11:00 a.m.

This past deals with diamonds.

That means: Bican, Friendereich, Ramallets, Leônidas, Meazza, Ramallets, Schiaffino, Moreno, Matthews, Di Stáfano, Puskas, Walter, Pelé.

Past discussed here is the one that lasts.

And not merely blah blah blah past.

If those names are still pronounced today it's because they DID WEIGH in the history of football.

And became legends.

A long, slow & difficult process: of which the contemporaries themselves participate.

If just belonging to the past conveys 'prestige', nobody would want to be 'modern' anymore.

And the Cronaldos of life would have to start commiting serial harakiris in order to become legends soon :D ...

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/9128/cristianoronaldoshirtle.jpg

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1907/js950a.jpg (http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1907/js950a.jpg)