Comparing generations in football

Wolf Club

I was discussing this with some friends a while back. We were talking about whether the current Barcelona team are the best ever, and wondering how they would have faired against, for instance, the Real team of the late '50/early 60's, the Ajax team of the early 70's, or the Milan team of the early '90's?

Of course, footballers nowadays are stronger, quicker and more powerful athletes due to training, but in terms of the actual skills themselves, does anyone think they have progressed or regressed? The equipment (ball, boots, etc) undoubtedly make it easier for footballers nowadays, and therefore it could be easier to say it has improved. But would the Madrid team with Di Stephano, Puskas, etc. be able to put it up to the Barcelona team if they were playing today?

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

You forgot to mention the Brazil team of 1970! I've seen videos them play (ie full matches) and they were amazing, like no other team I've seen play before. But for me the best team of all time is the current Barcelona team. The way they dominate even the best of teams is simply unique. I honestly don't think we'll ever see a team as good as them in our lifetime.

AnCapaillMor

All depends on who reffed the match, a 60's ref or a modern one. Hard to ever say, i'd love to see maradona in his prime now, see what he'd be like with some protection from refs.

Wolf Club

THFC wrote: »

You forgot to mention the Brazil team of 1970!

Sorry, I was thinking more of club teams. The argument has been made that the amount of European Cups Barca win will determine how they will go down in history. But because of the change in format, winning the Champions League involves much more now than when Madrid were winning it for the craic in the early days.

I'm too young to remember anything pre mid 90s, so the best teams I've seen have probably been the United treble winning team, Arsenal's Invincibles, and the current Barcelona team, of which the latter are the best IMO.

The Floyd p

90's Milan vs Late 00's Barcelona would be very hard to call.

Ebbs

Personally I cringe a little when people compare teams from different eras. Its nearly a different game.

I think if you were to drop the current barca team in the Premier League (1st Division) in the 60's they'd struggle. The tackles were different, the pitches, the refs, in some cases the rules, the ball, the boots etc.

The same could be said dropping a Madrid 1950s team in the premier league today, I dont think they'd be able to cope with the pace etc.

Its like when people ask who is better between a striker and a goalkeeper, they arnt comparable.

eagle eye

Its impossible to compare teams from different generations. Its likely that today's Barca would be much better than those teams but who knows what those teams would have been like given similar fitness/dietary/training.

You just gotta take those teams as the best of their generation and leave it there. Real Madrid in the late 50s/early 60s, Ajax in the early 70s, Liverpool in the late 70s/early 80s, Milan in the 90s were just awesome teams.

Personally for me and I remember the Liverpool and Milan teams well, I think this current Barca team is the best I've seen but I do understand that evolution of fitness, diet, training and tactics has a lot to do with that.

gosplan

IMO any team from the 90's or before likely be slaughtered by a decent team of today. I mean midfielders are practically running half-marathons these days in each game.

You can look at records though, say Madrid's 5 European Cups in a row or George Best's 40 goals in a season and say the players would have thrived today if they were subjected the same fitness/training regime.

Bodhisopha

Are you asking how Barca would do in another era or how great teams of yester year would do in this era?

ricero

the liverpool team of the late 80s were the best ever imo

Pauleta

I always use Mark Spitz as an example for comparing era's. In the 70s he was the greatest swimmer ever but if he did those times now a days, he wouldnt even make the finals of the U.S trials. Im not gonna bother debating it but sports people now are far more superior than back in the day. Its human evolution. Theres no way to measure it in team sports but it would be just common sense that people are just superior.

greendom

Pauleta wrote: »

I always use Mark Spitz as an example for comparing era's. In the 70s he was the greatest swimmer ever but if he did those times now a days, he wouldnt even make the finals of the U.S trials. Im not gonna bother debating it but sports people now are far more superior than back in the day. Its human evolution. Theres no way to measure it in team sports but it would be just common sense that people are just superior.

It's impossible to know but how much faster would Mark Spitz be with current training/dietary regimes ? A hell of a lot faster than he was then that's for sure.

stovelid

The lord can only imagine the volume of sniffling, weepy epistles to the press from the current Barcelona team if they were being tackled by some of the teams of the 70s and 80s,

bonerm

Barcelona's tiki-taka style was designed precisely to help a team of smaller & physically weaker players dominate a game against stronger players. So the idea of a physical 1970's 80's side bossing them off the pitch would possibly not even come to be.

stovelid

bonerm wrote: »

Barcelona's tiki-taka style was designed precisely to help a team of smaller & physically weaker players dominate a game against stronger players. So the idea of a physical 1970's 80's side bossing them off the pitch would possibly not even come to be.

Or that it flourished in an era of stricter and stricter officiating.

bonerm

stovelid wrote: »

Or that it flourished in an era of stricter and stricter officiating.

That too. But then again through history there's been countless documented cases of small skillful South American teams running rings around big European styles (Uruguay 7-0 Scotland 1954 comes to mind) so there's always been a history of skill beating strength. It's notable that many famous wins occurred in hot climates so weather could be as important as ref style etc.

stovelid

bonerm wrote: »

That too. But then again through history there's been countless documented cases of small skillful South American teams running rings around big European styles (Uruguay 7-0 Scotland 1954 comes to mind) so there's always been a history of skill beating strength. It's notable that many famous wins occurred in hot climates so weather could be as important as ref style etc.

Good point although the relatively more negative Italian style has won the second most WCs behind Brazil - and relatively more direct German style is third.

Likewise English teams are only just behind Spain for European cup/CL wins with the majority of those wins coming an era of football commonly consider to be the antithesis of the style you're lauding.

In fact one of the most cerebral and skilful teams to every play football never won a WC - The 70s Dutch team. The same was true of the Spanish (winning a major trophy) between 1964 and 2008.

I'm glad you mentioned other teams. For a terrible moment I thought the deification of Barcelona has reached such proportions that they would be retroactively credited with actually inventing skilful football. :pac:

As for the generational arguments - I just think there is a great team in every era. The fitness of top players these days is on another plane - as is coaching and nutrition which makes comparison difficult.

Pro. F

stovelid wrote: »

Good point although the relatively more negative Italian style has won the second most WCs behind Brazil - and relatively more direct German style is third.

Likewise English teams are only just behind Spain for European cup/CL wins with the majority of those wins coming an era of football commonly consider to be the antithesis of the style you're lauding.

Two of the Italian wins were way back in the thirties (they were still known as defensive back then) which makes those wins slightly less relevant I think.

The type of football the English teams were playing when they did so well in Europe wasn't the antithesis of the passing style afaik. Liverpool and Forest were good passers of the ball and were good at keeping possession, they just had the physical prowess too. Or, at least that's what I've been led to believe.

I think you can definitely compare teams between generations.

If a team from the fifties, or whatever, were time-warped into the present day, then they would benefit just as much from the improved fitness, diet and equipment.

Another brilliant team that I think often gets overlooked is the French team of the late 90's and early 00's. They were fantastic quality in every position except GK.

dfx-

Barcelona's style is suited to surviving the generations and fitness arguments. Controlling the game from the start with the ball will survive and reign supreme and even the famed 1970 Brazil side was a very far way from that team by virtue of...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3_NABDDen0

Before getting into the quality of opposition improving, there is some shocking waste/lackadaisical flicks and passes that would not be found at Barcelona..

monkey9

I don't think anyone can ever say with confidence who the best team ever was. Every great team has their own positive attributes and yet they'll never play against each other.

It's hard to say for me who is. I remember the great Liverpool team of the 80's (I'm convinced we would have won at least one European Cup, if not two back then and would have certainly tackled the great Milan team in their European dominance).

The aforementioned Milan, quality team. Jaysus.. Rikjaard (sic) Van Basten, Gullit, the poor man's Paul McGrath that is Franco Baresi!!! :cool:

I think it would be more relevant for everyone to state the best team they ever saw rather than what they think is the best team ever,

I don't mean at all to override the thread. It's just my two cents!

Warper

Wolf Club wrote: »

I was discussing this with some friends a while back. We were talking about whether the current Barcelona team are the best ever, and wondering how they would have faired against, for instance, the Real team of the late '50/early 60's, the Ajax team of the early 70's, or the Milan team of the early '90's?

Of course, footballers nowadays are stronger, quicker and more powerful athletes due to training, but in terms of the actual skills themselves, does anyone think they have progressed or regressed? The equipment (ball, boots, etc) undoubtedly make it easier for footballers nowadays, and therefore it could be easier to say it has improved. But would the Madrid team with Di Stephano, Puskas, etc. be able to put it up to the Barcelona team if they were playing today?

Simple is NO, the teams nowadays are better than the teams of the past. It is the same as every sport. Tactics, fitness, everything progresses and Barcelona are the pinnacle of soccer. They are total football played at its highest level.

parker kent

Warper wrote: »

Simple is NO, the teams nowadays are better than the teams of the past. It is the same as every sport. Tactics, fitness, everything progresses and Barcelona are the pinnacle of soccer. They are total football played at its highest level.

You can't say they are "better". You basically cannot compare across such wide eras. The rules are different now, the pitches are different, the ball is different. Basically everything is different. It has changed massively throughout eras. Teams were facing different challenges to the ones faced today and vice versa. Tackling is not "better" now, it is just different.

Barcelona (or any other team for that matter, lets not turn this into a Barca circle jerk!) from this era can only be the best in their era. How can you compare the challenges faced now to teams playing with a vastly different offside rules, tackling rules, back pass rule etc? Those rules mean the game is played differently than it used to be. The same way the game is played differently to when Nat Lofthouse could shoulder charge goalies over the line and celebrate a goal.

Think about the changes in a football. If Barca were transported back in time, how do we know that the tiki-taka style would work with an old heavy, leather ball? Or that the pitches would suit it? Or that they could do it with Norman Hunter or Dave Mackay chopping at their heels? Or that Liverpool in the 70s wouldn't just keep the ball at the back and knock it back to Clemence when they were in danger. Or what about the massive differences in formations? Teams in the 50s worried about having a decent front 5, that doesn't exist any more. They played with different rules, on a different pitch, with a different ball and lined up in different formations. Substitution rules differed through eras as did a plethora of other rules.

You can only surmise that the best players will always rise to the top, but we don't actually know that. For example, part of what made the Hungarian team so great is that they played the game in a different way. They were ahead of the rest of football. But in another era, everybody would be playing like that. Would they still be so great? Was it tactics or ability that made them great? You have to assume that their ability made the tactics work, but we don't know.

Barca are currently the best team, because they exploit the modern conditions and modern rules to the best of their ability. The same way any great team in any era does. But we can never truly know if those same players would be the best in another era. You cannot just say "Yes they are the greatest ever because the game is the best ever". Of course you cannot transport Madrid from the 50s and expect them to live with a team using modern sports science to the maximum. Of course Barca will be fitter and stronger. The same way you cannot transport Barca and expect them to thrive under the old rules and conditions. It is because of those massive differences, we cannot truly compare.

We should also take into account the difference in transfer systems, squads, agents, lifestyles, fame, money etc. For example, in England there was once a time when a great player could appear at almost any team, stay there for life and they would pop up and win a league. Sometimes promoted teams challenged for the title and even won it on occasion. Nowadays it is literally impossible for a surprise champion. Modern teams don't face that challenge. Teams stockpile the best players and the challenges are different. Instead of many threats, they face one or two strong threats or often none at all.

I could write 1000s of words on this. But the TL/DR version is that comparing across eras is foolish and you can never categorically one team is better than another from a different era.

Warper

parker kent wrote: »

You can't say they are "better". You basically cannot compare across such wide eras. The rules are different now, the pitches are different, the ball is different. Basically everything is different. It has changed massively throughout eras. Teams were facing different challenges to the ones faced today and vice versa. Tackling is not "better" now, it is just different.

Barcelona (or any other team for that matter, lets not turn this into a Barca circle jerk!) from this era can only be the best in their era. How can you compare the challenges faced now to teams playing with a vastly different offside rules, tackling rules, back pass rule etc? Those rules mean the game is played differently than it used to be. The same way the game is played differently to when Nat Lofthouse could shoulder charge goalies over the line and celebrate a goal.

Think about the changes in a football. If Barca were transported back in time, how do we know that the tiki-taka style would work with an old heavy, leather ball? Or that the pitches would suit it? Or that they could do it with Norman Hunter or Dave Mackay chopping at their heels? Or that Liverpool in the 70s wouldn't just keep the ball at the back and knock it back to Clemence when they were in danger. Or what about the massive differences in formations? Teams in the 50s worried about having a decent front 5, that doesn't exist any more. They played with different rules, on a different pitch, with a different ball and lined up in different formations. Substitution rules differed through eras as did a plethora of other rules.

You can only surmise that the best players will always rise to the top, but we don't actually know that. For example, part of what made the Hungarian team so great is that they played the game in a different way. They were ahead of the rest of football. But in another era, everybody would be playing like that. Would they still be so great? Was it tactics or ability that made them great? You have to assume that their ability made the tactics work, but we don't know.

Barca are currently the best team, because they exploit the modern conditions and modern rules to the best of their ability. The same way any great team in any era does. But we can never truly know if those same players would be the best in another era. You cannot just say "Yes they are the greatest ever because the game is the best ever". Of course you cannot transport Madrid from the 50s and expect them to live with a team using modern sports science to the maximum. Of course Barca will be fitter and stronger. The same way you cannot transport Barca and expect them to thrive under the old rules and conditions. It is because of those massive differences, we cannot truly compare.

We should also take into account the difference in transfer systems, squads, agents, lifestyles, fame, money etc. For example, in England there was once a time when a great player could appear at almost any team, stay there for life and they would pop up and win a league. Sometimes promoted teams challenged for the title and even won it on occasion. Nowadays it is literally impossible for a surprise champion. Modern teams don't face that challenge. Teams stockpile the best players and the challenges are different. Instead of many threats, they face one or two strong threats or often none at all.

I could write 1000s of words on this. But the TL/DR version is that comparing across eras is foolish and you can never categorically one team is better than another from a different era.

I can see where you are going. The raw talent might have been the same years ago but the progression the game has faced means todays footballer of 50% capability will always beat 1970's footballer with 50% capability. That is due to modern techniques being of a higher standard than before. I have no doubt that the current crop would be of better fitness, more tactically aware than any decades gone by. So in theory, they are of a higher quality.

seafood dunleavy

The acid test is if they can beat Stoke on a cold Wednesday night.

parker kent

Warper wrote: »

I can see where you are going. The raw talent might have been the same years ago but the progression the game has faced means todays footballer of 50% capability will always beat 1970's footballer with 50% capability. That is due to modern techniques being of a higher standard than before. I have no doubt that the current crop would be of better fitness, more tactically aware than any decades gone by. So in theory, they are of a higher quality.

Not necessarily. Modern football demands great athletes and places a premium on power and size. Barca are the antithesis to this, so they may stand out more than they would in a different generation. There were more smaller, skillful players in generations gone by. Their training may have meant they were more skillful on the ball that modern footballers.

Basically we don't know, so hypothetical games are pointless. Modern footballers are not of a higher quality, they are of a different quality. Everything is different to the game that was played in decades past.

enfant terrible

gosplan wrote: »

IMO any team from the 90's or before likely be slaughtered by a decent team of today. I mean midfielders are practically running half-marathons these days in each game.

You can look at records though, say Madrid's 5 European Cups in a row or George Best's 40 goals in a season and say the players would have thrived today if they were subjected the same fitness/training regime.

When did he score 40 goals in a season Wikipedia says his best total was 32 goals in 53 games?

Boskowski

I agree with people saying while the game itself improves over time it makes it impossible to compare an 80ies team to a 2010 team. In absolute terms the 2010 team will always have an advantage. Therefore I also believe today's Barcelona is the best team there ever was. At times I don't particularly like the way they're going on about it, but that they are.

Pro. F

Warper wrote: »

I can see where you are going. The raw talent might have been the same years ago but the progression the game has faced means todays footballer of 50% capability will always beat 1970's footballer with 50% capability. That is due to modern techniques being of a higher standard than before. I have no doubt that the current crop would be of better fitness, more tactically aware than any decades gone by. So in theory, they are of a higher quality.

What proof do you have that the modern technique is of a higher standard?

Have you ever seen footage of Maradona, Cryuff, Best, Charlton, Pele, Puskas? Their technique was fantastic and wouldn't be at all out of place in today's game. And it wasn't like the stand-outs had totally alien technique to everybody else back then, there was the full spectrum of ability, just like there is today.

bonerm

dfx- wrote: »

Barcelona's style is suited to surviving the generations and fitness arguments. Controlling the game from the start with the ball will survive and reign supreme and even the famed 1970 Brazil side was a very far way from that team by virtue of...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3_NABDDen0

Great clip. Most fans seem to watch 5 minute highlights of the final v Italy and then go on about that team like they were some collection of mythical supermen.

Frankly I think half the mystique about that team (besides of course them being the best team in 1970) was that it was the first world cup shown on tv in colour and then this team in bright yellow shirts come out and start playing attractive football. They were great, but not perfect.

stovelid

The argument is destined to be fruitless.

We agree that modern teams are fitter and stronger on a level far above past generations but the idea that they are inherently more talented than previous generations is utter conjecture and just part of the latter-day lionization of Barcelona where the only thing not breathlessly ascribed to them at this stage is the ability to heal the wounded and on-pitch levitation.

parker kent

stovelid wrote: »

The argument is destined to be fruitless.

We agree that modern teams are fitter and stronger on a level far above past generations but the idea that they are inherently more talented than previous generations is utter conjecture and just part of the latter-day lionization of Barcelona where the only thing not breathlessly ascribed to them at this stage is the ability to heal the wounded and on-pitch levitation.

As a kid Lionel Messi kicked a football into his ugly teachers face. She is now Miss World. Barcelona are also so good that FIFA are rechecking the records to see if Xavi on his own had in fact beaten Argentina in the first World Cup Final, not Uruguay as naysaying hoofers have been saying.

parker kent

bonerm wrote: »

Great clip. Most fans seem to watch 5 minute highlights of the final v Italy and then go on about that team like they were some collection of mythical supermen.

Frankly I think half the mystique about that team (besides of course them being the best team in 1970) was that it was the first world cup shown on tv in colour and then this team in bright yellow shirts come out and start playing attractive football. They were great, but not perfect.

I watched a good bit of the games from that World Cup over the years on DVDs, ESPN Classic etc and I actually think Germany were the best team at that World Cup.

Also, watching old games makes you realise how much the backpass rule has changed football.

dfx-

stovelid wrote: »

just part of the latter-day lionization of Barcelona where the only thing not breathlessly ascribed to them at this stage is the ability to heal the wounded and on-pitch levitation.

Well Busquets and Alves heal remarkably quick...must be their skill..

partyndbs

football from da past is awful stuff who would wathc that crap? stoke would beat the best teams from that era id say, like no wonder ppl back then scored so many goals, the keepers :O OMG they barely try to save the ball. they all look like sunday league players as well

btw i mean pre 80's and there is exceptions like pele

daithijjj

I can tell you one thing, this current Barca team would have got kicked off the park 20 years ago, nevermind 40 years ago.

And i dont buy this nonsense that evolution results in better teams again and again. If that was true, then a much a better team than this barca team is just around the corner, i dont believe that either. And judging by the last few world cups, which were rubbish, it hasnt passed down to national teams. The brazil of 20 years ago would rip the current generation a 'new one' imho.

Evolution of the game is just a consequence, id like to see this barca team try uneven pitches with a far heavier football, heavier football boots and far tougher tackling being allowed and see how they match up. Ditto and vice versa for the teams of yesteryear.

parker kent

daithijjj wrote: »

I can tell you one thing, this current Barca team would have got kicked off the park 20 years ago, nevermind 40 years ago.

And i dont buy this nonsense that evolution results in better teams again and again. If that was true, then a much a better team than this barca team is just around the corner, i dont believe that either. And judging by the last few world cups, which were rubbish, it hasnt passed down to national teams. The brazil of 20 years ago would rip the current generation a 'new one' imho.

Evolution of the game is just a consequence, id like to see this barca team try uneven pitches with a far heavier football, heavier football boots and far tougher tackling being allowed and see how they match up. Ditto and vice versa for the teams of yesteryear.

Exactly. Evolution results in different teams, not necessarily better teams.