There was an article in USA Today quoting Michelle Akers and Julie Foudy as being critical of the current coach, players, effort, etc. It made me wonder which players from which era were better. If you combined the rosters from the 1999 WWC Champs and this years 2015 WWC team, who would you pick from this combined pool of 46 players to be in your starting 11 ? Since 16 years have passed, you would think that a new generation would have benefitted from health, diet, coaching, etc advances but I am not so sure. Here is my choice for combined starting 11 GK: Solo DEF: Fawcett ---- Overbeck ----- Johnston ----Klingenberg MID: Rapinoe ----- Akers-----Foudy ------- Lilly FWD: Morgan --------- Hamm Captain = Overbeck (still the gold standard) I still pick a majority of 99ers to start.
These comparisons are intriguing. By position, I would love to have their times in a 40, 100 and what the H, a 5K before making my decision.
We might complain about how today's team is performing, but they would run circles around the 99 team.
Over beck, Foudy, and milbrett in her prime would run circles around this group. Milbrett was playing in the WPS and was one of the very best players in the league at age 40 competing against many of these players.
Overbeck was considered slow even in 99. No way would she be able to keep up with this team for long, not even with her other skills.
She was? I just remember this short player that still tucked her shirt into her shorts. Her and Brandi did absolutely nothing during their WPS season. I liked to call that club "FC OLD PRIDE. They finished dead last that 1st season.
I'd start Sauerbrunn over Klingenberg. I'd probably take HAO over Foudy. I would reluctantly incline to Solo (she plays the field and gets further distance on kicks than Scurry, but Scurry had the touch for the incredible save or two or several in '99). I'd take a 2011 Wambach over Hamm in '99, but I don't think I'd take the 2015 Wambach I have seen so far over Hamm. But, with the rest of the lineup the way it is, I would think about possibly taking Shannon McMillan '99 over Hamm '99 (Hamm's WWC was not great; one writer said that Mia stood for Missing in action). Since the one flip is HAO over Foudy, I wind up with a slight majority of 2015ers - even if I have to bring one off the bench whose own coach has bizarrely not started her yet!
Akers would make the team in the nurse's office. Hamm will make the team. Maybe Milbrett. The rest, no. Oppositions today are faster & better by a wide margin.
Lilly would make the team. Good passing in tight spaces. Quick. Good service and crosses around the box. Two way player. Hustle the full 90. The better the opponent the better she seemed to play. Don't shoot me but I'd pick her over Hamm.
Sorry to rain on the parade, but I don't dig fantasy teams, all star teams. Because you can't do it in reality. Moreover, what does it prove??
If Akers & Fawcett aren't only your list, your answer is invalid. Point of order: Are we talking about the player when they were/are in their prime? Or how they are in either '99 or '15? My 11 changes vastly based on which it is.
I don't remember her being that slow. Rose colored glasses I guess. The positive impression that she always made on me was with regards to leadership and composure.
I based my selections upon my opinion of the form that the players were in at the time of the respective world cups.
From 99 team, Fawcett, Akers, Lily and Hamm. 2015 team - Morgan, Rapinoe, Lloyd, Johnston, Becky, Kling, Solo. If it was in their prime, I'd add Wambach and take off Hamm. Hamm didn't show up in the biggest games. Milbret would be a 60 minute substitution. She was uniquely talented.