Alright Bernard Matthews.
Just carry on playing football manager or whatever you do to get your insane football knowledge.
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Alright Bernard Matthews.
Lennon would be fit 5% of the time, that sort of player wasn't existent then for a reason, he's ankles would be gone at 14The advantage for the skilled back then though was surely that everyone else round them was pretty much lacklustre.
Whereas today, your decent player would likely be world class in 1960.
Fuck me, imagine prime Aaron Lennon playing in the 1970s. You'd think England would have produced a fucking Garrincha regen.
Just carry on playing football manager or whatever you do to get your insane football knowledge.
I really don't get this argument.The advantage for the skilled back then though was surely that everyone else round them was pretty much lacklustre.
Whereas today, your decent player would likely be world class in 1960.
Fuck me, imagine prime Aaron Lennon playing in the 1970s. You'd think England would have produced a fucking Garrincha regen.
I really don't get this argument.
If everybody was " pretty much lacklustre" why weren't there more great players ?
It's up there with "It was easier to score goals back then "
Well, why wasn't everyone scoring as many goals as Jimmy ?
But only because nearly everyone else was "lacklustre", right ?There were loads of great players though...
Because he was surrounded by "lacklustre" defenders ?Because Jimmy was better?
but nowhere near as many as him.Just because he scored more than others doesn't mean others weren't scoring goals.
Nobody had anywhere near the consistency he had.. And because he was more than a goalscorer is why he's remembered as a great and the other guys who would get 30+ goals aren't.
Jimmy should definitely be included in the GOAT conversation and it amazes me that he's not, especially when you have Best mentioned in there.Almost like the argument that Kane is the best striker in the world yet many others are out scoring him every year.
But only because nearly everyone else was "lacklustre", right ?
Because he was surrounded by "lacklustre" defenders ?
but nowhere near as many as him.
Nobody had anywhere near the consistency he had.
Jimmy should definitely be included in the GOAT conversation and it amazes me that he's not, especially when you have Best mentioned in there.
So pretty much the same as today's players.Unless you had more about you that stands the test of the time like the players we still talk of today.
Playing against amateurs ?More that he was just a really really good player. You only have to watch full Tottenham games from that time or highlights to see he was a lot better than the amateurs he was pretty much playing against.
But still good enough for the 90sShame we couldn't plop him into the 90s beyond. But I think Greaves is in the category of players that you could put in any generation and he'll do well.
Which is my point.Greaves is a fantastic footballer.
So pretty much the same as today's players.
Which is why we will be talking about Messi in years to come.
Playing against amateurs ?
Which is my point.
If the great players of yesteryear were born in modern times they'd still be great players today.
It has nothing to do with playing against lacklustre opposition
Jimmy, Charlton, Best, Pele, Beckenbauer (spelling?) would still be great today.
The same way that Messi, Ronaldo (Fat and Portuguese), Kane, etc would still be great if he'd played back then.*
*Growth hormone permitting.
I don't believe in the argument.Perhaps but the level or quality is so much higher now that there's alot more players playing today who would look 10x better back in the 60s. As opposed to the other way round. That much is obvious.
As in the standard was terrible.
They would be great players. But likely wouldn't be remembered as much, no.
Cruyff is remembered because of total football and the turn. Your average Championship team can play total football with half their team cruyff turning twice per game nowadays. Football evolves.
That's not to say Cruyff wouldn't excel in a different way. He was a great footballer, but players from those days are like lore.
I'd argue modern day footballers would look better if you put threw them in a time machine than the other way round. Which says enough.
Sadly, the more and more time goes on, the more of these legends from the 1960s will continue to get blown out of proportion in comparison to the players from modern day because of the lack of people alive to actually have seen them sadly.
Saw that. It’s why he is so good. He can score nearly 100 goals and run the midfield at the same time. It’s why with no disrespected to Ronaldo, Haaland, Mbappe it’s just not remotely comparable, Messi’s all round game is the best by far of any player I have ever seen.
Exactly. When have you ever seen Ronaldo play passes like that? Even if he could he wouldn’t do it because he’s a prick.