simmo wrote:People on this thread suggested reducing physical stats for old time players thats why I commented here. You say you want it to be realistic but if players of di stefanos era played today they would have the equipment of today. Allowances should be made for that. To not take that in to consideration would be like rating F1 drivers based on how fast their car was.
That is a bit hyperbolic with the F1 car analogy..To me you then start to guess too much at what stat should be where because you have to make a "technology-adjustment", what is that standard for that then in terms of pes stats (+3 Acceleration to all pre 1970)?
Would then this not impact how old players interact with modern footballs? Would they even be as skilled dribblers and shooters!? Should they have a handicap here? Modern balls are crazy in the way they float about in mid air or can be curled, I had the fortune of playing with a ball similar to what might have been used in the 50's (leather parallel patches stitched together..http://www.memorafootball.com/shopping/ ... ingdom.jpg
something like this) its characteristics are COMPLETELY different from a circa 2014 football, it was heavy and a dream to dribble at a slow pace, it stayed put and could be manipulated..to me would players transported magically into the present immediately pick up the skills to master today's ball despite learning all their skills on those old balls, maybe their passing and shooting accuracy would be worse, as today's ball can easily get away from you and have a mind all its own. Or are we going to assume these transported classics also benefit from learning their skills in today's environment..then let me ask, who are these "classics" anymore? As they will no longer be the players from our past, forged in conditions that made them uniquely of a certain era, but instead of Pele I would get Neymar Sr. right?
To even out the speed thing a bit, shin guards were not mandatory till 1990, and few players used them (they actually seem to have been abandoned after the 1950's) - so here we have a bit of give either way, heavier boots earlier on, forsaken shin pads made mandatory in a time of lighter and lighter footware - its about the same impact, if not tit for tat (as a player personally who hates shin guards, they actually throw me off whenever I've used em).https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/20 ... this-a.jpghttps://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/or ... fe8aa3.jpghttp://worcesterherald.com/wp-content/u ... -Today.jpg
He gots no shin pads
it is all fine, so what we see on the screen of em being slow tempo gits is inexcusable by boots
simmo wrote:Players certainly recover faster today due to better knowledge of diet anatomy etc. But are they more agile, faster, stronger, im not so sure. As you confirmed players played far more minutes per season in days gone by. Sure the game is faster now, but if players are physically superior why do they need so much rest? Wouldnt they be able to play all the matches?
I did not confirm that. I stated that some
players fortunate enough to have their club and national team perform well might play 40-50+ matches in a season, something that is regularly done by players from mediocre teams currently, and stated that Pele was one of the lone exceptions in the past that equaled what some modern players do in a single season. By this reasoning Championship players ought to be athletic beasts as they do a marathon of games in a league season compared to low table EPL sides..Yes in England teams played 42 or so matches a season in the past, but many foreign leagues were much smaller, Serie A and La Liga were like 30 matches in a season... The trend for 20 team leagues is a "recent" one of the 1990's to make more money of television, only in England and I think Brazil (long ago had some regional leagues of like 60 games a year) was this ironman thing popular in the past.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didier_Drogba
Drogba 2003/04 55 appearnces for Marseille, Ivory Coast 7 app in both 2003 and 2004 / 2006/07 60 app for Chelsea, Ivory Coast 14 app in 2006 and 8 app in 2007.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lewandowski
Lewa consistently many years near 60 games a season, last season went 60+
It is not just about playing lots of games, use this analogy, you can walk and jog 10km every day for a week, but try to jog (start to finish) 10km and have 10 sprints of 30 sec in that jog of 10 km, do you think your body could as easily cope with doing that for 7 straight days? That is the case with modern players, the speed of some of the actions that they undertake in match, and the clustered schedule of games, couple this with as you mention a very competitive modern environment, if a player struggles he gets subbed off because there is an equivalent star on the bench, otherwise rested to be at a peak level...I am not saying that players in the past were incapable of matching what today's players can do, but how frequently they do it, and that all their competitors are also playing at an extremely high level gives modern matches consistently a more frenzied energy - which was present in the past, but I just did not see it as often in matches and when it did happen it was in shorter bursts followed by long lulls.
simmo wrote:Sorry for the double post but using england as an example it used to be 42 league games its now 38 most teams put out weakened sides in the flc and fa cup until maybe the qf or sf as the money for league positions and getting in champions and europa lge and avoiding relegation is all that matters. Leading players back then were looking at 54 matches if they got to both domestic cup finals, of which most players would have played 50+ thats before internationals and euro comps are included, how many do that now? Only the 3 or 4 key players the rest probably would play 30-40 games max
Addressed some of this above, keeping intensity up at a high level is more difficult - a car analogy, a bit F1 if you like, you know how it is to make a car go faster and sustain that speed you need exponentially more horsepower to offset the rolling resistance and drag encountered as you move faster - I forget the exact numbers but at ~ 400km/h something like 100hp extra is needed to attain a 10 km/h increase. Same deal at lower operating speeds my Honda Fit ~130hp I can average 30,000 km in a year and my mom's Infiniti Q50 330hp only does 20,000 km in year, WAT!!?? Oh yeah I have a longer commute (play in the Championship), but most definitely the Honda Fit is only happy at 60-110km/h, the Infinit comes alive only at 120km/h (and burns a silly amount of fuel) also 4.4 sec to get to 100km/h
. Distance (Matches played) does not communicate how quickly/intensely those distances were traveled.
simmo wrote:Would a reduction in mentality be a good solution to the difference in playing styles between the ages? I dont believe players are necassarily fitter now or tactically superior but the game is more coach orientated. Fear of failure and job security and financial gain have made winning more vital. I think games were more open in the past not because of tactical naivety or poor defending but more to do with less pressure to win and players played for pleasure so a more open style was common. Reducing mentality would replicate the slower more open style without penalising the individual players who if they were inferior wouldnt be dominating all time XI selections would they? Comments regarding attack being capped for old classics is a bit harsh. Logic would then dictate defenders should be capped nowadays because they have more protection and more defensive tactics than the classic defenders had. Great players with intelligence will always find solutions. If not, 1system would dominate forever. Things evolve and players adapt
Yes the MEN idea makes sense, a different approach by non/semi-professionals, with less at stake .. it might make some of those "heroic" leadership figures stand apart some more, you know the kind who raised the morale/effectiveness of the whole team when they played.
Older sides were not necessarily tactically naive, its just football was such a new game with little in terms of innovation (those "pyramids" were around for a long time), and all subsequent tactical innovations have been ways to exploit/capitalize on law changes in the game and an "arms race" of new ideas to counter existing ideas. So modern sides have the benefit of all the mistakes from the past, and the collective experience of "tacticians" that can negate other teams just by adjusting their own team slightly - its not something that I seen in the past, aside from a specific DMF kinda guy coming on to disrupt things or to man-mark a danger man...I always wonder when will be the next leap/if there will be in tactics..lol 3-5-2 was supposed to be dead by the end of the 90's cuz the 4-4-2 then 4-5-1 made it obsolete, yet it seems to be back in a big way..I thought the 4-6-0 of Spaletti's Roma a few years back to be a new door, but no idea is really making sweeping trends its all just isolated instances to certain teams later being mixed and matched/melted together by other teams..I suppose this might be the new "frontier", a melting pot of all available ideas.
I know in PES I've used ancient 2-3-5/3-2-5 formations (with mediocre players) with great success agaisnt a range of modern formations/teams - but that is in a video game not coded to really expect that I guess, in real life Pep is one of the few to employ anything close to a 3-2-5 with Bayern vs domestic mid-table or lower sides (with mixed effectivness) - otherwise I've only ever seen old formations like 4-2-4 kinda being used in desperation by Championship sides in playoff games...I guess Chile used a 3-3-4 ish formation a couple years ago, but they worked harder than most modern teams forget about any side from the 60's, to make that system function vs modern sides.
But is that not a bit the case with today's defenders? How many 90+ DEF defenders are there, 13 according to the ladders and only 8 are not retired (Godin is the only RED one) - it seems to me that there were a bit more better tacklers even a decade ago and I think the 1990's had even more of those kinds of guys - its something that has been noted that players today seem to lack the ability to make a proper clean slide tackle (that might be again impacted by the laws of the game, where sliding tackles from behind tend to be frowned upon these days unless they come off perfect - it thus sets up an environment where fewer players engage in the practice and lowering the standard in that area)..This thing with enforcement of the law of the game is another thing, modern players are given much less margin for sloppy tackling - cards are dispensed much more frequently - which it seems to make for cleaner challenges in general, some games even in the 1960's were madness comparatively...Well Pele was one of the greatest and the solution in 1966 was to kick the fuck out of him, he quickly found the way home to Brazil
.. I just think that some of the early greats like Dixie Dean, G. Meazza, Wwilimowski etc. would struggle a bit vs modern defences, and would not be instant monsters - I could be wrong though.
In the future please edit your post, rather than 3 consecutive posts
, I completely missed the first two originally as the link takes me only to the most recent post .