Why was 2000-01 of a lower level? What shows that? Ballon d'Or only is not flawless; like how you disagreed with the 1992 winner (did not see an argument TBH).
My opinion, having watched most Real and Barca games of both seasons. I never said either was perfect, just one better than the other.
@greatstriker11 Forgot to say that with 'market size' you can *buy* 'football culture' or the desired cultural traits (and it can 'destroy' the cultural line of re-production elsewhere). Not that it is always easy, but importing/exporting knowledge is key. Prime example is current Spain in football obviously.
i agree. with "buying" culture at the "expense" of destroying cultural line of re-production elsewhere. However, I still think that we underestimate the resilience of a culture to change, adapt, adopt, adjust, accomodate, assimalte you name it. "Enculturation" is a more natural and feasible endeavour then "acculturation" generically. That's why we have revolution to bring change to a system that cannot be transformed through evolution. Only abrupt events and with aggressive force (physical or non-physical) can bring forth change in an already established culture. In the case of promoting football culture in a non-footballing nation, this aggressive can be attained through spending. But there's a caveat here: The US and Venezuela and even China, will have to acculturate football in order to become a traditional footballing nation on the long term. The Netherlands and England have enculturated football over a 100 years ago and thus football has became pretty much a nations identity here. And the path to acculturation can be harder to achieve then enculturation. An example: The US has hosted the most watched WC in history till today. No other WC drew more audience then WC94. Second, they bought Pele, the most famous footballer in history, to play on their premises. Thus the best of football in terms of tournament and players has already been introduced to the american audience, and yet in the face of all these efforts, still not much has changed in terms of sport culture in the US. American football and baseball are still dominating their culture and won't share a piece of the cake with soccer any time soon. We saw a few more soccer moms dropping kids on training camps after school time, yes. And yes, "Major league soccer" got more professional and the quality of game and players better. But it is still a minority sport and will never match that of American Football or Baseball, never! Why because it isn't how Americans identify themselves. It's not a national identity. Same goes to Venezuela. A traditional baseball nation. Baseball, pretty much like the states, is a national identity which represents the Venezuelan everyday culture. It's part of every day life conversation on the streets. But in recent times the Venezuelan NT has picked up momentum and they no longer are to be taken lightly in Copa America or even WC qualifiers. Not any more, for they can sporadically beat their big opponents. They are not 100% pure underdogs any more and it is just a matter of time that they might even beat Brazil or Argentina given enough time for maturity. Having said that baseball will always be their sport #1 in which they find themselves better represented as a nation. So US and Venezuela are good examples of how difficult or even unlikely it is to acculturate a nation into football. The US may have the spending power to buy the necessary infrastructure for a successful football league, but acculturation cannot be bought with money Puck.
The latter doesn't exclude the former. And the other way around too; the former does not exclude the latter part (I think that is part of greatstriker11 his post). LATE EDIT: key difference Spain has with *almost* any other country is that it is both an importer and exporter of key assets, in terms of football. It has also a connection with the relevant fora, UEFA programmes and major (youth) competitions. Ofc, they have learned better as some others; 20 years ago their main stars were foreign-educated players (at Barca, Real Madrid and other clubs) - like Stoichkov, Bebeto, Dukic, Penev etc. Today a big chunk of their pivotal stars have been grown inhouse.
I don't see how it's different to Italy. La Liga and Serie A are the two leagues that have historically imported top-flight players from South America, Continental Europe and Africa. They have been doing this for a very long time, the EPL, Bundesliga, Eredivisie and Ligue1 however have started mass import of players relatively recent (although even back in the 70s Ardiles was in England and Bianchi in France). @PuckVanHeel @AD78 @greatstriker11
Indeed, it is not much different as Serie A. However, at some of their great sides the key players were Italian; I'd say more so as Spain perhaps. Italy has always been reasonably good in developing players inhouse. Secondly, it is not only about importing (top quality) players.
@Lewa9 aka @James88 aka @riflex - Good tricks but they are Ronaldinho's patent (just done over and over again). Still don't see that first trick that Maradona did in the video
I think perhaps the difference with Italy versus Spain is that (excluding the last ten years) the stand out players at the top clubs have been an import where in Italy there has been more top Italian players. An example I would use is if pre Xavia and Iniesta, you said wh were the best Barca players of all time, the names of Cruyff, Romario, Figo, Rivaldo, Ronaldo, Stoichkov, Laudrup etc.......... and with Real it would be Di Stefano, Puskas, Kopa, Sanchez, Zidane etc..... fair enough the likes of Suarez, Raul, etc.. would get in also.. Compare to Italy then you again have the Platini, Maradona, Gullit, Van Basten, Rijkaard, Matthaus ......but you also have the likes of Baresi, Maldini, Baggio, Del Piero, Rossi, Zola, Rivera, Riva etc..... so in general there have been as many yop non Italian players as Italian. In my view until recently in Spain this has not been the case.
I think you give a pretty good account of why, despite all the 'aid' and efforts, football will remain a problematic enterprise in the United States. Apart from the individual sports, at least four team sports are ahead of football and are more lucrative too. Though, once that popularity exists I think - with up and downs - it is possible to 'buy' the necessary culture and knowledge. A country like the Netherlands (like almost every other country bar the 'top five') is in the detrimental position to be only an exporter of 'golden assets' and not an importer. Lack of access to top class competition remains a bottleneck for many countries, esp. in the 'modern era' (think about the league itself, youth tournaments, limited access to UCL and other friendly matches; good countries like to exhibit against other 'AAA' brand countries - occasionally even on a neutral venue like Wembley or so).
That's my impression too, though there have been a few Spanish sides with their main stars mostly Spanish: Atletico Madrid 1962 (CWC winners), Real Madrid 1966 (EC winners), Real Madrid 1985 and 1986 (UEFA Cup winners, although it had Stielike, Valdano, Sanchez) Barcelona 1989 (CWC winners), Valencia 2004 (UEFA Cup winners). During the late 50s and early 60s, the winning sides of EC and Fairs Cup had mostly foreigners as key players I'd say. However, in case of Italy it might be said too that Baresi, Maldini, Rossi, Rivera, Riva and some others won nothing, or did not shine as brightly as when their teams became strengthened with foreign stars as well. Rivera his Milan was substantially strengthened with foreigners (in his early years Rivera his Milan had Altafini, Ghiggia, Victor Benitez, Dino Sani etc.); Rossi turned into a successful club footballer (team trophies) when the borders became re-opened again etc.
I think the problem of the Netherlands for being a main exporter and not importer of players can be seen from a business point (economics) like you described above, but also from a point of (or lack of sense) nationalism. We the Dutch we lack a sense of nationalism like that shown by the Spanish and Italians. We think too much in business terms. We do not look at our Dutch born players as a national identity, but more like a product that has a good sales value. We are too business minded, even in our everyday life. We are good (financial) traders and engineers, very calculating cold minded and good at organising stuff. But we lack passion for our own locally produced goodies. When we go to Albert Hein, we look down on our products and think that the imported ones by default should be of better quality (except for cheese of course, hahaha). Simply because it came from abroad. We do not want to export any of our national identities with the objective in mind to make Holland's identity and culture stronger (or dominate?). Yes it is true that outside of the Netherlands, the world does link us with our nice Tulips, Windmills, Cheese which seem to be the best representation of our culture. but unfortunately that is changing and fast. Since ganja coffee-shops and brothels and debauchery is taking over that image of ours and fast! This is due to the fact that we the Dutch do not control what is ours. We do not put pride in the things we do. But to the contrary, the Italians exported their Pizza, Pasta and Culture world over, and so did the Spanish. Spaniards are very nationalistic and think in provincial terms. We the Dutch think that we are a small part of a bigger world and that we do not entitled to dominate. That's why every time when we teach that WC final match, somehow the idea that we're on the spot to become world a dominance freaks us out and make us stumble and fail. The WC is their for grasp. Spain broke a precedence when they won it in 2010. I guess that happened once they started to believe in themselves as a capable force. We the Dutch still have to overcome that hurdle. To cut it short, "culture" can not be bought with money. The Romans tried it out for hundreds of years and couldn't change the mindset of the people in Judea. All they could do is build tall majestic buildings but the people never changed.
Good post but I did not only mean the players import/export (who are ofc very important for making other players better too), but also other things ('assets'). As superficial example: the good coaches, physiologists and trainers on senior and youth level. Just sayin'. You're right that it is sometimes (more) in the mindset of some countries to pursue experiences abroad - even in case it would pay not as good as at home! Percentage of people possessing a passport isn't the same everywhere, that's true.
Guys ... it was like a cycle as the world turns From 80-90 Italy produced more great players, (more so then Spain and England) but from mid 2000's til now Spain produced more better players ... 80-late 90: Italy got many top players Attack: Rossi, Baggio, Totti, Del Piero, Signori, Vieiri InZaghi MF: Costacurta, Conti, Donadoni, Gatuso, Pirlo DF: Baresi, Maldini Scirea, Gentile, Cabrini, Bergomi, Ferrara, Nesta Canavaro Zambrotta GK: Zoff, Zenga, Buffon, Toldo 90-2010: Spain produced more in turn with: Attack: Raul, Morientes, Villa, Torres, Silva, Carzola, Navas .. MF: Pep, Xavi, Iniesta, Mata, Arteta, Xabi Alonso, Busque, Isco Cecs ... DF: Hiero, Puyol, Ramos, GK Casillas, Canizares, Valdez, Da Guia Italy got a bit MORE WEIGHT in term of top notch All Times (in bold)
On the European setting you may be correct. Italy and Spain dominate. However, on global scale, I think Brazil produced an even greater shear number of talents then anywhere else in the 90's. In the 90's Brazil exported to Europe: Romario, Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Cafu, Dunga, Edmuno, Bebeto, Tafarell and the list goes on and on. Can't beat this list to be honest. From strikers to defenders to goalkeepers. Playing in all leagues from Spain to Italy to Holland and Germany. They were all over the place. And out of the list above, at least three (Romario Ronaldo Rivaldo) went on to become true all time legends. And then came the 2000's with Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Kaka, Robinho, Lucio, etc. I think in terms of shear numbers and dominance no country can beat Brazil when it comes to production of quality of players. Having said that, considering the size of the Netherlands as one of the smallest footballing countries in Europe, we the Dutch have (over) produced way above any expectation in terms of quality of players consistently since Cruyff till present. We had three waves of production above expectation: 1. Cruyff era. 2. VanBasten/Gullit era. 3. Seedorf/De Boers/Kluivert/ era and now we're in the middle of Robben/Van Persie era (current era). We the Dutch are always present in the very top of the game continuously. No let up! @PuckVanHeel @Pipiolo
Yes, Brazil was stacked in the 90s. Definitely the Netherlands is a continuous producer of elite footballers, their footballing culture places foremost emphasis on great technique and physical fitness, the key ingredients for success. In terms of leagues, La Liga and Serie A have historically had the best foreign players: DiStefano, Puskas, Rial, Kopa, Kubala, Cruyff, Kempes, Schuster, Sanchez, Gonzalez, Romario, Laudrup, Stoichkov, Redondo, Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Figo, Beckham, Riquelme, Forlan in Spain and Schiaffino, Sivori, Bertoni, Elkjaer, Platini, Boniek, Maradona, Francescoli, Matthaus, Van Basten, Gullit, Rikjaard, Hagi, Weah, Klinsmann, Caniggia, Batistuta, Zidane, Nedved, Shevchenko, Rui Costa in Italy.
Netherlands belongs to the group of countries that is regularly outrun and outmuscled by others. Though they belong to the tallest nations on the planet of course (like almost all Northern-European and Northern-Asian regions). Anyway, I'll close it off now but there's serious danger that it follows the path of Scotland, Sweden, Denmark (etc.) who had once also a fairly constant stream of good players between the 50s and 80s-90s and have fallen off the map since (largely as a result of modern football economics). Very true that Spain and Italy were in terms of players the greatest importers. Btw, Italy has always had a fair share of foreign managers and trainers as well whereas Spain was for a long time a bit reluctant it seems, until the mid-80s (with the English managers, Beenhakker etc.) more clinging on Spanish trainers and managers; that's my gut-feeling at least.
In other words, in terms of leagues, historically: La Liga>Serie-A>EPL>French Ligue 1>Bundesliga. in this order?
I seriously doubt the Netherlands are going to go the way of Scotland or Denmark, who were never at that level to begin with. @PuckVanHeel Wouldn't you place the Bundesliga ahead of Ligue 1 based on success in the EC/CL? @greatstriker11