He is a striker that's why. His performance is judged by numbers. At liverpool he was their best player and had the best numbers in the team, in Barcelona, although he had better numbers there than in Liverpool, there was a guy who was more impressive than him (two guys actually). And Suarez never got chance to win player of the year award. He was close in 2014 and 2016 based on his performances but i don't see your overal point. The only reason Eriksen is not rewarded as the best Tottenham player is because he is playing in less attractive role than Alli and Kane do. He is not a scoring machine, neither he needs to be to fit Barca in the sense i was talking about. We all know that goalscorers are the most praised players, which gives you an answer to your "wonderment". Incomparable situation, try next one.
I wanted to show that run that Eriksen made. Go to 3:55. Eriksen sprinting from right flank to penalty box found by Kane's pass who was previously found by Eriksen pass, but they didn't show it. That's something Rakitić can't offer to Barcelona's game, at least not for whole 90 minutes or at such intensity.
Here is a video to illustrate Real's dominance: They scored after 44 passes, that's something that hasn't been done in 12 years http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017...st_once_as_they_worked_-a-3_1503303268127.jpg They are not slowing down guys.
being a striker has nothing to do with it. I guarantee you, if eriksen ever even somehow found himself at barcelona during their prime with xavi, busquets, iniesta, and thiago, then eriksen would not have once stepped foot on the pitch! it`s because the level of players is significantly higher at barcelona than at liverpool or tottenham!!! no, no, no. i have to strongly disagree on this one. players like ronaldinho and zidane are righly regarded players and highly adored far more than players like henry, etoo, kane and alli can ever hope to be. ronaldinho and zidane were winning golden ball honors and regarded as the best players despite the several other players that scored more goals than them. even a player like Kante from Chelsea won the best player in england above harry kane and lukaku who both scored far more goals. even a player like hazard who scored less goals was more of player of the year for the EPL than kane and lukaku.
I could argue that, but it doesn't even matter how they are perceived in media. In most cases it doesn't justify quality of players and we all know that very well on many examples. Media is the last thing you should look at, it's only valuable in scarcity of information, like when we talk about players in 1920s, 30s, 40s and so on. Then we look at who has won what, how many goals they scored and what media thought of him at the time. These days when you can type in what ever player you want in youtube, when you have full matches at your fingertips,.. media is the last thing you look at. I will end this Eriksen conversation here, on my part, because i have said everything i had on the topic and since that transfer to Barcelona is not happening in first place, there is no point to continue it. Conclusion on my half. Rakitić is a better central midfielder in general atm, Eriksen, with few minor modifications on his game that Rakitić has also suffered, better fit for high press tiki taka.
PSG have better midfield than Barcelona, the ******** are you talking about? And if you are saying that just because Verratti got owned by Isco last night on multiple ocassions, that's pretty insane.
Verratti is their only world class midfielder. Rabiot is good, but not world class. Motta is in decline sinze years. Pastore is a cam, Draxler also and i don't see the current Di Maria being a great CM as used to be in Madrid days.
Interesting. UEFA recruiting for a Competitions Quantitative Analyst looking at a range of issues including competitive balance/formats. pic.twitter.com/hphUanPBmf— David Phillips (@lovefutebol) September 25, 2017 Also a fun role for a Strategic Data Manager (working in the newly established Intelligence Centre with a friend of mine/@footballmba alum). pic.twitter.com/iBAKVtknCC— David Phillips (@lovefutebol) September 25, 2017 #NoSurprisesEverythingSimulated (for UEFA and elite clubs as official business partners)
It means that for "political objectives" [sic] they want to corner every eventuality, chance or scenario, from the draws to financial distribution (see document), and "design", "prepare" and "develop" accordingly. It is very well possible it is no coincidence this department is established when there are some structural reforms taking place (including the big teams/nations as official business partners, as Marcotti has pointed out). The description raises some interesting questions.
@benficafan3 (to take this to a more appropriate place) Yes, the commentator yesterday said it too. That Mendes had a heavy hand in both Monaco and Porto, which is not suspect in itself but very risky. And (which I already knew) that the laws on work permits and labor rights are conducive to high fees and having a competitive team. Also that the Portuguese top teams are heavily indebted and reliant on transfer incomes, which makes them relatively weak vis-a-vis someone like Mendes. See this report, the pages near the end (on assets etcetera). It does give more cash for the youth programmes and paying good players of course. http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles...aorg/Finance/02/42/27/91/2422791_DOWNLOAD.pdf As I said in the other thread, both Croatia and Belgium are heavily reliant on structural state aid and likely that cannot last forever. And at some relevant authorities some red flags have been raised (also internally, within the countries), as well as on that state aid. Speaking of Mendes: is he also involved in the Ballon d'Or lobbying do you think? I'm starting to doubt CR7 will win it this year.
Is Mendes lobbying against CR7? Never heard anything about this. Can't see CR7 not bagging it tbh. I'm almost 100% certain he will.
@PuckVanHeel There is no doubt CR7 will win the Ballon this year. After the final against Juventus,it became a foregone conclusion among the general public that he would win. In essence, it was deemed then that he had reached the 'threshold' required where another player, regardless of quality/performance in the remainder of the year, could not surpass because the relevant titles to be won had already been disputed. In reality, what will likely happen is that people will view CR7's win as perfectly fine for meritocratic reasons, whilst in their heads already labeling Messi as the favorite for next year's award. Rinse and repeat the charades ad nauseam. Regarding your question on Jorge Mendes... Hm. Do I believe that the most influential superagent in the world, whose main client is arguably the globe's most marketable athlete, has a say in what goes on in the affairs related to the sport's most marketed award? The same man who influences a myriad of other operations within the sport..Hmmmm. If he had a personal history of striving for world peace and kissing babies, I'd be tempted to say no, he doesn't influence the Ballon D'Or. But as his history is, in reality, mired in a sea of unethical and questionable practices, I'll have to go with an answer of "hell yes".
And to add to the Jorge Mendes point, Benfica saw firsthand yesterday, at the hands of Basel, what happens when you sell your soul to the devil. Like a drug addict, Benfica suffered 'withdrawals' from its dependency on the 'Mendes drug', unable to invest during the summer transfer window and properly pay down its respective debts, despite selling players for 100 Million Euros. Those agent fees ain't paying themselves. The rate and direction at which the sport is going I can only assume that in 20 years time we will be seeing European Champions held in Dubai during the winter. Maybe holding the final on Christmas to really rub it in.
Yes, two good posts by you. Imho that hoarding of youngsters is imho at three levels not good for football. 1) they don't complete their education, preferably in their home country or a familiar culture. This has huge effects on young people. A youth programme like at Ajax is designed for the full 10 years. It is like dropping out of school after the 2nd year. 2) it discourages clubs to invest in youth players. Yes, for commercial reasons it doesn't impact Brazil much (third parties jumping in), but it has impact on say a club like Anderlecht. 3) they don't get adequate chances, even when they're really good. http://www.football-observatory.com/New-Football-Observatory-study-unveils-crisis-of
Massive report in El Pais detailing ticking time-bomb at PSG. Cavani rejects €1m sweetener to give pens to Neymar. https://t.co/4VLUUpiChc— Colin Millar (@Millar_Colin) September 24, 2017 This can't be serious
---> the idea that FCBs era is over was a bit premature. In fact, ditching Neymar and Qatar might have been successful. https://www.si.com/soccer/2017/10/0...ed-barcelona-season-despite-summer-turbulence
Only thing that is premature is that article. After the Spanish Super Cup there were cries of his inability to be up for the job, but a month later he's "reinvented" Barcelona. The only changed variable I see is Messi's performances. If his performances from the Super Cup, which were below par relative to his ability, extended until now, would there be talks of Valverde "reinventing" Barcelona? Unlikely, particularly given Suarez has been shooting blanks. What happens when Messi goes through another "slump" in form? Barcelona's success this century had come from its internal structure, and was never down to a single coach. Even Guardiola relied on the fruits of Barcelona's successful system, specifically the production of the likes of Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Puyol, etc. This is what "invented" Barcelona this century, not a single coach, or a large transfer signing. These days the likes of Alex Grimaldo leave Barcelona early in their career to be given a proper chance to play, with the board instead throws millions hoping something sticks (looking at you Andre Gomes). And to correct your last sentence, it was Neymar that ditched Barcelona, not the other way around. In no way am I saying Valverde's chance of ending the month of May with a treble under his belt is slim to none, but claiming he's reinvented Barcelona when we're three days into October is absurd.
Messi's "slump" in the form was specifically due to Barcelona's inability to be a competitive team in big games, not due to Messi's inconsistency or something of that matter and if you ask me, Enrique is the only reason for Barcelona's failures past two seasons so simple change of a manager might do the trick.. for that reason i am against saying that Barcelona is in overal major decline until they keep failing under different managers (it would be wrong to say that Barcelona was in irreversible delcine back in 2014 under Tata Martino, wouldn't it?) Although concluding that Barcelona solved all of their problems in October is wrong, it's equally wrong to say that they are having a major decline just because of one player leaving the team. As we all know, Neymar's departure opened a lot of doors for Barcelona and football being complexed as it is, not having a world class player might be a good thing for them atm, so shall we all just wait with any kind of conclusions at this stage?
Right now IMO too much is on Messi's back with respect to the offensive output while he is often still dropping back to the midfield to start things up. Against the tougher teams he will have problems being this effective. Barca hasn't really played anyone of quality in La Liga.
Another variable that has changed is that Busquets looks to be back at his best compared to the glorified friendlies that were the Supercups games. For the style Valverde wants to play, Busquets his role and job is crucial.
Busquets is a key one for sure. During the MSN era, the higher tempo more direct style didn't suit Busquets, who was groomed to play the Xavi-style football, too well. Tactically, Barcelona has looked better, but questions definitely still remain over their personnel quality in comparison to Madrid.
I am aware of all of that, but that's all theoretical. If i learned something about football is that the way things seem on the paper doesn't always correspond with what is being shown on the pitch. I don't see why would i close an opportunity for Messi to score 60+ goals while playing that deep and Barcelona having a success at the same time after all. It's a fine line between success and failure in football Arguments that go in barcelona's favor this season are the fact that they are outsiders this season (nobody expects anything from them this season) so they can play without pressure, they bought Semedo who seems to have a potential to be the best fullback in the world and they are very motivated to bounce back from this. Funny thing is that Barcelona depends less on Messi's individual quality this season then they did year ago, despite everything that happened to them. Let me explain,.. if you have watched Barcelona often in past 2 seasons you would notice that their offensive plan was just to give a ball to Messi or Neymar and wait for them do everything, now, at least they are working as a team for Messi, rather than Messi working for a team, so it's a bit different. Can Messi pull this off for whole season and in big games? If anyone can, Messi can. At the end of the day it will all come down to whether Barcelona is comeptitive enough in other segments of the game to allow Messi to make a difference (because if he is introduced with chances, he will take them, cough-el-clasico-cough) and that has a lot do with Valverde's set up, and not in-form or out of form individuals. Busquets has always been on the same level, it's just that Enrique's approach was criminally bad, i actually pointed that out in Leganes vs Barcelona game at the begining of last season saying that they need to change things to have any chance in ucl, i repeated that against Sevilla and Sociedad games later on because nothing has changed by then, but Enrique kept making the same mistakes so the fact Barcelona was humiliated last season was due to Enrique's poor managment rather than Iniesta being washed up, Busquets out of form or Rakitić in a decline, etc...I can elaborate what are those mistakes Enrique kept making. I've seen everything that can be seen about Barcelona and they are not far behind other teams.