why are defenders so underrated

we had several discussion about this before ...

in brief, FOOTBALL is a game to WIN by SCORE goals = hence the merit goes (naturally) to the attacker

Is it fair? nO but in MOST CASES the best skillful players in a team are ATTACKERS (except very few case in Beckenbauer, Scirea, Yashin .... of older days)

 

Koeman gets commonly underrated because of his attacking abilities.

 

Yeah, for DF, most greats were LEGENDS for being able to go up in attack or compose attacking from deeper zone :
Beckenbauer, Breitner, Carlos Alberto, N Santos, Fachetti, Thuram, Maldini, Figueroa, Vogts, Blanc, Carlos, Cafu, Zanetti, Amoros, Brehme, Rugerri , Passarella, Krol Junior Scirea, and ...Baresi (to some extent)

Only a few greats for "pure defensive skills" Da Guia, Moore, Nesta , Gentille, Costacurta , Canavaro ...

 

Defenders get underrated compared to attacking players because their role is deemed easier and unattractive. It's the same reason why the highest paid fees are for attacking players (mainly forwards) and not defenders. Scoring, creating and breaking down defenses is seen as more difficult (and it is) and therefore it is valued more, by fans and clubs who spend money on players.

 

I don't agree with that, if defending was "easier" we would be seeing better "defending" these days?

As for "highest paid", I also do not agree with you, because, of course, an attacking player is more marketable than a defensive player, of course, an attacking player will sell more shirts and win more fans than a defensive player, of course, this directly generates winnings for the club, and of course, the club will need to pay more money to that particular player.

The notion that defenders win less money, because defending is understood as something easier than attacking, is simply wrong, in my opinion.

If not ask Florentino Perez what happened when he sold off Claude Makelele, according to Zidane and Hierro he was Real Madrid's most important player, yet you would not know that by looking at how much money Makelele was making. If Makelele's job was easier than Zidane's role, then surely, Real Madrid would have found a replacement for Makelele very easily, just like Juventus found a replacement for Zidane with relative ease.

Or, AC Milan would've found a replacement for Baresi with relative ease, I mean, the same way AC Milan

The notion that "money" somehow determines the difficulty level of each specific role, is wrong, naive, and just plain disrespectful.

So the best singers win more money than average over-hyped singers with pretty faces? Or does a great film win more money than an average over-hyped brainless film? Football is no different than that, and no, making an average film is not more difficult than making a great film.

Yeah you can easily find 20 players better than Baggio at his position..... I'm sure I have a good idea of the "20 players" that you have in mind, and I'm also sure that I disagree with that.

Personally, I can only think about maybe five of them, who were better than Baggio at his position. But twenty? Baggio was not an ordinary player by any means, he was not the 21st best player at his position, I can guarantee you that.

 

Because forward players are more flashy and steal the limelight, though I agree defensive players are just as important. Hence my list in the thread I just made of the best European players ever which has lots of defenders and GK's as well.


"baggio great great player but i can name like 20 players betetr then him for his position"

This is just wrong though, sorry. Baggio didn't get the best out of his talents because of the way he was misused by coaches and serious injury's....

http://forzaitalianfootball.com/2013/03/the-oppression-of-roberto-baggio/

But, he still had a very good career and was one of the (top 10 easily, probably top 5) most talented AM's ever. Just go and watch some videos of him and look at his goal stats. He was a true genius, the best player at rounding the goalkeeper and tapping it in of all time, go and watch his goals, he made it look so easy. one of the best freekick takers ever too. He could do it all. He was definitlty the best attacking Italian player ever, insanely talented. It's too hard comparing him to Italian defenders like Baresi though as how do you compare a CB to a AM/Support Striker?

If I had to describe Baggio to somebody who has never watched him he was basically a slower, weaker version of Messi with not as good finishing at short distances(Though Baggio was a better FK taker and had a better long range shot).

Messi is better yes, but not by as much as you and most people who never watched Baggio think, crucially Messi has been afforded total freedom at Barca and Argentina, Baggio never got that freedom for the reasons stated in the article I posted above.

 

Because they are usually less talented than the midfielders and forwards.

 

Tony maybe mixed up with TOP25 or TOP50 best all time. NOTE: Any legends in TOP100 are all special players (out of millions thru out history)

So what "position" you think Baggio was in TOP5?
I can help to start with : as FW/SS ? Or as Play maker? Please do not mention AM as he won;t make TOP99 there!

Let's see how you and Tony list them out ...

 

[ No English/British kid in the Nineties ran around in a Umited shirt pretending to be Steve Bruce or Gary Neville playing for his local club side in the Champions Lge./old European Cup... ]

 

Offensive players especially those with great technique and flair will always be regarded more positively than defensive players.

As an example look at David Luiz an offensive Center Back that is a fan favorite because of his offensive runs and free kicks more than his defensive work.



[]__[]

 

Baresi was great in attacking

 

he was good to very good. NOT great ... (if compared to other names)_ that's why I also listed his name there

 

those names should be compared to Pele/Maraodona/Cruijff Distefano /.... LOL

 

Just as expected, the "20 players better than Baggio at his position" are none other than the usual suspects, players who you have barely seen play, because there's barely any videos of them to begin with. You don't impress me, you don't sound "knowledgeable" to me, you sound pretentious. How old are you again?

Now I'm just going to mention pretty basic facts about football: Pele revolutionized the game in the 1960s, Cruijff revolutionized the game in the 1970s, and then players such as Zico and Platini and Maradona kept the tradition going, and then in the late 1980s AC Milan revolutionized defensive pressing (changing the game forever), etc, etc.

If you want proof if just how much football changed between the early 1980s and the early 1990s, look no further than Maradona.... Maradona was not "man-marked" in the 1986 WC, England did not man-marked Maradona in the quarter-finals, Belgium did not man-marked Maradona in the semi-finals, and West Germany did not man-marked Maradona in the final, if I rememeber correctly only Italy used man-marking tactics on Maradona. Now, fast-forward to the 1990 WC, and Maradona was man-marked in every single game that he played, including all the group stage games.

That's no accident, that's the evolution of the game. All those great players, Pele, Cruijff, Zico, Platini, Maradona, forced an evolution both in defensive tactics and offensive tactics.

Now when you say that "Puskas" was better than Baggio, I know that you are talking about a football player who played between the 1940s and 1960s, I know Puskas played the game at a time when defensive tactics were very simple and flawed (note: sophisticated man-marking tactics didn't even existed back then, as was exposed by Garrincha at the 1962 WC), and I also know that the video footage of Puskas that you can actually watch is very very limited both in quantity and quality.

When Puskas played the game, the game had not enjoyed the many revolutions that forced the game to evolve both defensively and offensively.... This is no joke, WWII was still going when Puskas started playing professional football, I mean, we are talking about a guy who already played football at a time when Adolf Hitler was not dead.... This Ferenc Puskas is old as shit, I'm sorry to say this, but big businesses were involved in the war, big businesses had no interest in the sport of football at the time that Puskas started playing the game.... Back then, Europe was not nearly as competitive as in Baggio's time, this is not a "debatable" point, this is a well documented fact. Now, if you want to ignore how much big businesses changed the European scene for the better, be my guess, but I'm not a fool and I'm certainly not going to agree with your science fiction.



You watch that Michel Platini video, and two things stand out very clearly,

1st -- It is patently obvious that football in the early 1980s was a lot slower than football in the early 1990s. If football got faster as a result of Maradona's one-man show at the 1986 WC, or because of AC Milan's innovative defensive pressing that everybody started to copy, that is up for discussion, but what cannot be debated, is the fact that football in the early 1990s was significantly faster (and tactically more sophisticated) than football in the early 1980s. Sorry but "evolution" happens, don't hate me for it, hate science for it.

2nd -- Platini's goal between 02:22 and 02:36, would be impossible in the early 1990s.... just look at how slow the defensive lines react.... Platini merely chipped the ball with his heel, and the defender just stood there like an idiot.... quite simply, you could not score goals like that in the late 1980s and early 1990s, just try to find a Van Basten or Baggio goal in which the defenders didn't even try to do anything. The fact of the matter is that Van Basten and Baggio played against more organized and more sophisticated defensive tactics, you had less time on the ball, the game was faster, etc, etc.

You put Baggio against that poor standard of defending, and he would score even more unbelievable goals than the ones he did scored for Juventus.

Baggio played at a time in which "man-marking" tactics had been developed to their peak, as a result of Maradona's domination more than anything else. This "man-marking" peak period, then added to AC Milan's innovative defensive pressing in the late 1980s, which led to some of the most brilliant defensive displays the game has seen, the 1990 WC being an example of such a defensive period, and the 1994 WC (note: which was won by a defensive Brazil side, including a final against the Italians who are historically recognized as the masters of defense) was another example of that period of time in which "man-marking" tactics peaked.

Baggio played at a time in which big businesses started to invest heavily into football, Baggio played in what was described as the best league in the world at the time; can you say the same about Puskas or Cruijff?

Cruijff was better than Baggio? I disagree, West Germany used some basic man-marking tactics on Cruijff and Cruijff didn't knew how to raise to the occasion. Not to mention, the fact that football in the 1970s was a lot slower (a lot lot slower) than football in the early 1990s. Cruijff was faster and physically bigger than Baggio, but he could not do the range of abilities that Baggio could do, as simple as that.

Also, and perhaps more important with regards to this discussion, as a second striker, Baggio was simply (and obviously) better than Cruijff ever was or could be as a second striker. You could argue that Cruijff was a better attacking midfielder, but "better than Baggio at Baggio's position"? Ridiculous, Baggio could create a goal from nothing from virtually any position on the pitch, Cruijff could not do do that despite the fact that football was a lot slower back then.

Platini was not better than Baggio at Baggio's position, Platini was considered a number 10, whereas Baggio was considered a 91/2, Platini and Baggio were fundamentally different, again, how was Platini better than Baggio at Baggio's position?

Well, for one thing, the fact that you actually think that Cruijff and Platini (same old usual suspects) are better than Baggio at Baggio's position, makes it beyond obvious to me that you haven't really seen Baggio. Baggio was faster, stronger, and a better dribbler than Platini, as a second striker he was simply more dangerous than Platini could ever be.

Also, "technique wise" Bergkamp was probably in the same level as any player. Yet, why was it that Bergkamp could not rival Baggio when he played Serie A football? Why was it that Bergkamp could not even do better at the 1994 WC, than an injured Baggio who played the whole tournament at less than 70% of his capacity? For a player who, according to you, was "technically" as good as Baggio, Bergkamp sure failed to rival Baggio.

Same goes for Laudrup, played for Juventus, did nothing for Juventus, actually he could not even score a single goal after Platini retired. For a player who was "technically" as good as Baggio, he certainly could not deliver the performances that Baggio did delivered for Juventus. Not to mention, the fact that Baggio never had team mates such as Romario or Stoichkov or Platini.

Bergkamp and Laudrup had to leave Italy, Baggio did not, there's a reason for that, Baggio was a better dribbler and tactically more astute than both of them. Yes, Bergkamp had excellent technique, but he never could nor did grab the ball in the midfield area to then dribble past an entire defense to then score a goal. The expression "technique wise" is very vague, it doesn't specify anything really.

Bergkamp, Zidane, Cantona, and Laudrup, are not even close to Baggio "position wise", in his position Baggio comfortably beats them in every conceivable respect. Are you sure you watched Baggio in his peak?

The great Pele, I always keep him out of all discussions involving football, simply because the defensive tactics of his time are (undoubtedly) very poor, he played the game at a time in which the game was played at snail pace.... So even though I can certainly see that Pele offered a very rare mix of athleticism, strength, two-footed ability, and creativity, I still find it very difficult to compare him with modern players. There's a very fine line between "bias" and "glorification", I believe players like Pele, Di Stefano, Puskas, Cruijff, Platini, are overrated. Some people would say that I'm "biased" against the mentioned players, whereas I would say that they are "glorifying" the mentioned players. Chose your side, I guess.

As for, hidegkuti, kubala, schiaffino, moreno, dalglish.... Listen, I am 27 years old, I am not a 50 year old dude who has seen every single star player who played in the 1960s and 1970s and 1980s and 1990s. But fortunately though, I have seen more than enough of Cruijff, Platini, Laudrup, Bergkamp, and Zidane, to confidently formulate my own opinion with regards to those players, players who I do not think were better than Baggio at Baggio's role.

Players that I think are better than Baggio at Baggio's role? Lio Messi, and Diego Maradona, just those two. I can't say about Zico because I have barely seen/watched Zico. Hell, I'll even give Pele the benefit of the doubt, and say that maybe Pele edged Baggio in terms of physical strength and athleticism, which would mean that I am assuming that Pele would adapt well to the man-marking tactics of the early 1990s.

But Cruijff, Platini, Zidane, Laudrup, Cantona, are simply not better than Baggio at Baggio's role. For that reason alone, I'm just going to assume that hidegkuti, kubala, schiaffino, moreno, dalglish, are not even close to Baggio at his position. Having said that, I'm also going to assume that you are a 60 year old, seeing how you like to talk about football players who were playing the game at a time when Adolf Hitler was still alive.

 

leadleader
you forgot to say IMO .... tied up with your (limit) knowledge !
my 2cents vs your long post (too many HOLES)

(at same position)
1- Until now, very few could have shot (power and precision) as Puskas - Baggio was far from that! So STOP commenting like Puskas was "old SH$$$T" just becuase you don;t know NOTHING about him! WHY many put him as best ever European player (along with Cruijff)? whereas Baggio could BARELY make into TOP20? Here we only talked of European players (let along many greats from SA OK?)

2- in play making art: Laudrup, Zidane Cruijff Platini Zico were one level better than Baggio (not even mention Pele/Maradona/Di stefano ...) Baggio was a skillful player (AGREE ) but he was NOT a natural play maker - that's why many coaches HESITATED to use him (

Now over all :

3- His "consistency in high level games " were so SHORT compared to other greats ...
4- Finally Baggio was NEVER a TOP10 best materials so STOP making him equally to those (TOP10 names ) in any aspects ... ANY ...

 

You have no clue. Stick to the South America and MLS threads.

 

and you go back to your worm place LOL

 

I was about to jump in ...
I bet even Baggio would feel ashame /shy of himself if he read that comment LOL
I am sure Leadleader did not mean it he just want to exaggerate things (the only way) to counter my saying (!) _ Baggio was NEVER a TOP10 materials in which Cruijff was clearly in TOP3-5
His WC94 was the most (and ONLY) deadly weapon to back up his greatness .... though