Jump to content

The unpopular football opinion thread


Deuce

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, macphisto said:

@Kid Icarus @Ken Boon What are you actually referring to when you say a higher standard these days? 100% agree about the improvement in players fitness levels/lifestyles and tactical nous/tactical discipline. I'd also say the role of defenders has changed beyond recognition in how they defend, attack and now have to be far more comfortable on the ball. Likewise, the role of the goalkeeper has also changed dramatically, personified by the video of 80s goalkeepers just whacking the ball down the pitch:lol:.

 

I would say though that the improvements above have been offset by the fall in strikers and midfielders. The league winners in Italy, Germany, Spain and England all had main strikers in their mid-30s or in Man City's case often preferred not to play with a striker. I know there has been advances in sports science but for not one of the main league winners to have one main striker in their mid-20s is unusual and doesn't say much about the younger generation of strikers.

 

Midfielders, I'll just use England as one example. Compare England's midfield now to the "golden generation". I've got no time for the "golden generation" but I do have to admit that they're light years ahead of the current midfield.  

 

 

 

 

 

This is a very good point, same in the 90's, we had a plethora of top quality strikers whereas today we have Kane, then there's a big drop off to Abraham, Wilson, Calvert-Lewin, and then another big drop off to the best of the rest - who I can't even think of. Compare that to Shearer, Fowler, Collymore, Cole, Sutton, Ferdinand, Wright, Sheringham, Le Tissier. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, kingxlnc said:

This is a very good point, same in the 90's, we had a plethora of top quality strikers whereas today we have Kane, then there's a big drop off to Abraham, Wilson, Calvert-Lewin, and then another big drop off to the best of the rest - who I can't even think of. Compare that to Shearer, Fowler, Collymore, Cole, Sutton, Ferdinand, Wright, Sheringham, Le Tissier. 

The best of the rest would be Chris Wood[emoji38] and I'm being serious with his record for Burnley. No England manager has had such a pick of strikers as Venables in 96 with the players you listed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II

Tactically, fitness etc. the PL today compared to when it first launched is way ahead, but in the 90s England could pick from Shearer, Cole, Sir Les, Ian Wright, Le Tissier, Fowler, Collymore, Sutton, Sheringham, Dublin et al. All of them today would be ahead of perhaps any England striker other than Kane. KK’s 93-96 team would wipe the floor with half the division. It was far more entertaining and competitive back then, more balanced and each team seemed to have a top striker or one capable of getting 15 goals at least. Today if Kane or anyone really gets 15 he’s had a good season. Back then it was the norm. 

 

 

Edited by HTT II

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, macphisto said:

The best of the rest would be Chris Wood[emoji38] and I'm being serious with his record for Burnley. No England manager has had such a pick of strikers as Venables in 96 with the players you listed.

 

 

Wut?

 

"I dont know why he doesnt pick Antti Niemi, hes only 28"

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, geordie_b said:

 

Wut?

 

"I dont know why he doesnt pick Antti Niemi, hes only 28"

 

 

Apologies, I was mixing up England and PL! I meant a level below the current England strikers you listed in the PL would be Wood where he scored between 10-14 PL goals a season for Burnley.

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, HTT II said:

Tactically, fitness etc. the PL today compared to when it first launched is way ahead, but in the 90s England could pick from Shearer, Cole, Sir Les, Ian Wright, Le Tissier, Fowler, Collymore, Sutton, Sheringham, Dublin et al. All of them today would be ahead of perhaps any England striker other than Kane. KK’s 93-96 team would wipe the floor with half the division. It was far more entertaining and competitive back then, more balanced and each team seemed to have a top striker or one capable of getting 15 goals at least. Today if Kane or anyone really gets 15 he’s had a good season. Back then it was the norm. 

 

 

 

 

Aye, Dion Dublin was up there with Pele and Maradona :lol:

 

Have a word with yourself, man.  Collymore, Sutton, Dublin were all good to average strikers but nowt special. Wright, Le Tissier, Cole and Fowler did nob all for England.  Just rose tinted glasses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
1 minute ago, loki679 said:

 

Aye, Dion Dublin was up there with Pele and Maradona :lol:

 

Have a word with yourself, man.  Collymore, Sutton, Dublin were all good to average strikers but nowt special. Wright, Le Tissier, Cole and Fowler did nob all for England.  Just rose tinted glasses.

I’m talking about OUR game here in England relating to the 90s to now. Dublin was massively underrated btw, a member of the 100 PL goals club. And they did nowt because we had so many good forwards we couldn’t exactly play them all! Where did I compare them to Pele and Maradona!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II

Oh and Dublin, Sutton and Collymore in their prime and on form would go for silly money today. They would be considered some of the top strikers in the division today. Where as back then, aye talented and handy, but every team seemed to have a Dublin or a Sutton capable of 15 goals or so.

 

 

Edited by HTT II

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
Just now, triggs said:

England strikers looked better in the 90s because the league was so much worse

More open, less tactical and teams went out to win home or away. I agree overall it was worse, but far more entertaining. Horses for courses…

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, loki679 said:

 

Aye, Dion Dublin was up there with Pele and Maradona :lol:

 

Have a word with yourself, man.  Collymore, Sutton, Dublin were all good to average strikers but nowt special. Wright, Le Tissier, Cole and Fowler did nob all for England.  Just rose tinted glasses.

 Is that not because Shearer was playing for England at that time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HTT II said:

Oh and Dublin, Sutton and Collymore in their prime and on form would go for silly money today. They would be considered some of the top strikers in the division today. Where as back then, aye talented and handy, but every team seemed to have a Dublin or a Sutton capable of 15 goals or so.

 

 

 

 

What a load of crap.  Dion fucking Dublin the saviour of strikers now :lol:

 

They were average then, they'd be average now.  You're just getting old, mate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
3 minutes ago, macphisto said:

 Is that not because Shearer was playing for England at that time?

It’s stupid to deny we didn’t have an embarrassment of riches up front and even in other areas at that time. Again, they did nowt because they didn’t feature much because of having a Shearer and a Sheringham for example up front. 

 

 

Edited by HTT II

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
3 minutes ago, loki679 said:

 

What a load of crap.  Dion fucking Dublin the saviour of strikers now :lol:

 

They were average then, they'd be average now.  You're just getting old, mate.

Who said they are the saviour of strikers? Put the cheese and tuna down and take a chill pill! Dublin today would be one of the higher rated forwards in the PL man. 

 

 

Edited by HTT II

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HTT II said:

More open, less tactical and teams went out to win home or away. I agree overall it was worse, but far more entertaining. Horses for courses…

 

Goals per game in the current PL is higher than it was in the 90s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
Just now, Wullie said:

 

Goals per game in the current PL is higher than it was in the 90s.

But the strikers…

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
Just now, Wullie said:

 

Goals per game in the current PL is higher than it was in the 90s.

Probably skewered by Pardew and Bruce’s NUFC defence…

Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, triggs said:

Amazing how the quality of English strikers sunk like a stone just as clubs began to sign loads of foreign players

 

Seems to be the case for most nations though isn't it? 

 

Majority of the best attackers recently have been wide forwards or attacking midfielders. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jaqen said:

 

Seems to be the case for most nations though isn't it? 

 

Majority of the best attackers recently have been wide forwards or attacking midfielders. 

 

That's because most teams don't play 2 up top anymore IMO

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
1 minute ago, triggs said:

That's because most teams don't play 2 up top anymore IMO

Or with real wingers!

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, macphisto said:

@Kid Icarus @Ken Boon What are you actually referring to when you say a higher standard these days? 100% agree about the improvement in players fitness levels/lifestyles and tactical nous/tactical discipline. I'd also say the role of defenders has changed beyond recognition in how they defend, attack and now have to be far more comfortable on the ball. Likewise, the role of the goalkeeper has also changed dramatically, personified by the video of 80s goalkeepers just whacking the ball down the pitch:lol:.

 

I would say though that the improvements above have been offset by the fall in strikers and midfielders. The league winners in Italy, Germany, Spain and England all had main strikers in their mid-30s or in Man City's case often preferred not to play with a striker. I know there has been advances in sports science but for not one of the main league winners to have one main striker in their mid-20s is unusual and doesn't say much about the younger generation of strikers.

 

Midfielders, I'll just use England as one example. Compare England's midfield now to the "golden generation". I've got no time for the "golden generation" but I do have to admit that they're light years ahead of the current midfield.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's absolutely Basil Fawlty at 1:13.

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, HTT II said:

Tactically, fitness etc. the PL today compared to when it first launched is way ahead, but in the 90s England could pick from Shearer, Cole, Sir Les, Ian Wright, Le Tissier, Fowler, Collymore, Sutton, Sheringham, Dublin et al. All of them today would be ahead of perhaps any England striker other than Kane. KK’s 93-96 team would wipe the floor with half the division. It was far more entertaining and competitive back then, more balanced and each team seemed to have a top striker or one capable of getting 15 goals at least. Today if Kane or anyone really gets 15 he’s had a good season. Back then it was the norm. 

 

 

 

I don't know about that :) as fun as those times were, English club football was well and truly in the doldrums.  For example, when we blew the title in 96, English teams were having probably the worst season they've ever had in European football.  Manchester United were knocked out by Rotor Volgograd, Liverpool were knocked out by Brondby, and Blackburn managed to finish bottom of a European Cup (ok, 'Champions League') group containing the might of Spartak Moscow, Legia Warsaw and Rosenberg.  And they weren't backs-to-the-wall upsets - they were all deserved.  We took 78 points in an utterly shite English top flight.  And the 94-95 side would be relegation candidates today IMO - they were pretty woeful after November.

 

Few of those players were getting offers from top European clubs - didn't Shearer say he had offers from Genoa and Samp at a couple of points?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Being boring here but the whole Grealish/Almiron stuff needs to end. Saw another mention of it this morning on twitter and it’s done now. It should have been finished after he got snapped in a friendly by his international team mate but how frequently it gets brought up now is getting embarrassing. 
 

Every time he has a good game or scores there’s some sort of comparison. Stop. 
 

I think I’m getting old. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...