You forced this combined 11. Rice and Foden don't get into the 11. Also Kane depending on formation.
England Golden Generation myth.
- Thread starter Lebo
- Start date
You forced this combined 11. Rice and Foden don't get into the 11. Also Kane depending on formation.
Rice and Bellingham is a better set than nearly any other national team can boast.
Neither are stand out passers, both very physical, but hardly commanding games with their passing.
Does it have to be the golden generation instead of a golden generation?
The current England side, on paper, is one of the strongest national teams in the world.
I think by the next world cup we will have more of a golden generation.
Feels like we need players like Brantwaithe & Guehi to grow. Hopefully a LB like Davis gets promoted to the PL. I can even see Rashford playing better under a new United manager and for our attack to be less lopsided.
I wouldnt call it golden gen just yet.
Mainoo, Rice, Bellingham, Brantwaithe, Guehi, TAA, Wharton, James, Foden, Saka, Rashford,Grealish, Gordon, archie gray - its close but still not there to make a dominant first 11.
I actually think someone like Kane retiring could help the balance of the squad - making us play someone like Foden or even Palmer as a False 9 to help inverted forwards like Saka and even giving Bellingham some freedom. Maybe Bellingham could play as a false 9 instead because he seems to be allowed complete freedom of movement at real Madrid much like Messi at Barcelona.
Rashford/Gordon- Foden/Palmer-Saka/Bowen
Bellingham/Grealish
Rice/Wharton - Mainoo/Gray
Davis/Hall- Brantwaithe/Guehi- Stones/Tomori -TAA/James
Trafford?
Is a bit of a football manager type of first 11-22 i want to see before i call this the golden generation.
In what respect? Rice is good in terms of keeping things ticking and Wharton is an excellent progressive passer. Just look at any of his compilations and he gets so many pre-assists with his passing that fools everyone.
I agree with OP and said as much the other day. Bellingham and foden in particular are over rated. Good players but not WC. Would swap them in a heart beat for say, Gerrard or Scholes.
Mainoo hasn't shown much of a passing range as yet, and the numbers have him very low (bottom 9%) for progressive passes per 90. Much of that is down to the dumbass tactics Ten Hag stuck with in midfield but this idea some have of Mainoo as being a game controlling passer has not been shown yet. Very good at keeping possession with exceptional ball control, drbbling and short passing angles but to take the next step he will need to show an expanded range.
My opinion is that we can't even compare that England team with today. Should they meet I would say that 2006 team would have a fun day on the pitch. You just need to look at midfield and back four to understand. Players that are starting today would not even be in that team back then.
Oh I realise, he's not at all a standout passer. United often has similar problems to England I find. We don't have someone like Carrick or Scholes anymore, and it really hurts us.
Mainoo is good at keeping that ball and keeping it moving against the press, which is why I consider him our best.
Watch football instead of FB Ref.
Watch football and not just YouTube clips.
The current squad is not at the level of golden generation.
It was a full first 11 full of experienced multiple PL and CL winners.
The problems for me with both though are the same old issues that always repeat with England…
1. Picking players/names and then trying to squeeze into a system rather than the other way round. Golden generation it was trying to squeeze Beckham, Scholes, Lampard and Gerard into the same team. This time it is likely to be trying to squeeze Foden and Bellingham into the same space.
2. The complete under appreciation of high IQ, ball playing midfielders, in favour of Roy of the Rovers all action types. English media has always preferred and hyped all action Gerard types, or Lampard type goal scorers, over the players who knit it all together. It may not appear so on a stats sheets, but the latter type in my eyes are far, far more important to the overall success of a team.
Give me a Kroos, Rodri, Modric, Xavi, Busquets, Pirlo, or later years Scholes type everyday of the week over a Gerrard or Lampard. And although he wasn’t absolute world class tier, Carrick would have made the England team significantly better. I hope Wharton doesn’t end up being that player of this generation.
It was a full first 11 full of experienced multiple PL and CL winners.
The problems for me with both though are the same old issues that always repeat with England…
1. Picking players/names and then trying to squeeze into a system rather than the other way round. Golden generation it was trying to squeeze Beckham, Scholes, Lampard and Gerard into the same team. This time it is likely to be trying to squeeze Foden and Bellingham into the same space.
2. The complete under appreciation of high IQ, ball playing midfielders, in favour of Roy of the Rovers all action types. English media has always preferred and hyped all action Gerard types, or Lampard type goal scorers, over the players who knit it all together. It may not appear so on a stats sheets, but the latter type in my eyes are far, far more important to the overall success of a team.
Give me a Kroos, Rodri, Modric, Xavi, Busquets, Pirlo, or later years Scholes type everyday of the week over a Gerrard or Lampard. And although he wasn’t absolute world class tier, Carrick would have made the England team significantly better. I hope Wharton doesn’t end up being that player of this generation.
It's always the golden generation. Be the same for the next Euros aswell
I do, I watch Wharton regularly as he's one of my favourite players currently and Everton were tracking him for ages.
Interestingly the Palace fan agrees that Wharton's strongest skill is his passing...
Also if you're going to use FBref to say that Wharton is a bad passer then don't say Rice is average in the same post as his FBref indicates he most certainly isn't.
I 100 percent agree with this. We won't learn though, just look at what the papers and pundits say about the players we didn't bring, just more about squeezing in big names.
England do not have a standout passer other than Trent.
Not really. But very few have ever been strong in every position and had decent strength in depth.
I think this England squad is massively over rated and they'll struggle to get beyond the first knock out round.
Average keeper,
2 really good right backs, one can't defend
One really good centre back
No decent (fit) left back
Midfield is decent but lacks balance, it's Rice+1, but that +1 option hasn't been tested properly.
Stacked with really good attacking midfielders, but they can't all play at once.
RW one really good player (Saka)
LW one decent in form player (Gordon)
CF 1 world class option
"In sport, a Golden Generation, or Golden Team is an exceptionally gifted group of players of similar age, whose achievements reach or are expected to reach a level of success beyond that which their team had previously achieved. "
I don't really see why the term shouldn't be used about a England team that, on paper, has had one of the strongest squads for the past 2-3 tournaments. Even though you had a better generation of players in 2006, a generation of players that achieved feck all.
You've put that in quotation marks but that's not what people are talking about with regards to English football.
The "golden generation" is used for the England side of the 00s.
Nobody has ever called England in 66, Man United in the 90s and 00s or Liverpool in the 70s as the "golden generation".
This comment is the epitome of the attitude of English fans/press that I was getting at in my previous comment.
Trent is a world class player of raking 80 yd passes, whipped crosses, even now defence splitting through balls from central areas.
What he isn’t though, is the player who knows when to play a 5 yd first time forward pass along the floor vs a more expansive option…. when to hold, when to release… when to speed it up, when to slow it down… when to turn, when to play back…etc etc…. and therefore for me, will never be an elite midfielder in the shape I prefer.
What TAA has, much like say Gerard, is world class technique. They are not world class passers.
There are world class passers out there now who never do anything half as flashy as either of those two. Case in point. Rodri.
Massively overrated is a bit of a stretch. I think Englands chances have already peaked and with the goalkeeper + defence situation they'll struggle.
Then again, apart from France, there aren't really any better squads around.
The biggest problem in the "Golden Generation" era was the straightjacket 4-4-2 that Sven constantly implemented. I think he only briefly changed to a 4-1-4-1 for second part of 2006 World cup.
Another big problem was also trying to shoe horn Beckham in when he was past his peak around 2004/05. Can remember England trying him out as a deep lying CM for a few games and it didn't really work (one was losing to Northern Ireland in a qualifier).
4-3-3 would've been far better. It was what Mourinho played at Chelsea as soon as he came in and Benitez eventually changed Liverpool's structure and moved Gerrard out wide or as support striker.
Hargreaves, Carrick and Barry were all available as defensive midfielders but barely used in major tournaments.
Think England's best chance in that time was 2002 World cup. 1-0 up v Brazil and the path would've been Turkey in SF and then Germany in final who England had beaten 5-1 less than a year before.
Another big problem was also trying to shoe horn Beckham in when he was past his peak around 2004/05. Can remember England trying him out as a deep lying CM for a few games and it didn't really work (one was losing to Northern Ireland in a qualifier).
4-3-3 would've been far better. It was what Mourinho played at Chelsea as soon as he came in and Benitez eventually changed Liverpool's structure and moved Gerrard out wide or as support striker.
Hargreaves, Carrick and Barry were all available as defensive midfielders but barely used in major tournaments.
Think England's best chance in that time was 2002 World cup. 1-0 up v Brazil and the path would've been Turkey in SF and then Germany in final who England had beaten 5-1 less than a year before.
Well, it's essentially the definition of a golden generation. You can have more than one. Doesn't really matter that the squad from 06 is better player vs player. Which generation is better than the other only has an impact on the golden generation, not if this generation is a golden generation.
Yeah completely agree. There's a reason in last few years Klopp has never seriously played TAA in central midfield and he's always gone back to RB (even when Conor Bradley was doing well at start of the year).
He's much better floating the ball over the top to Salah/Diaz etc than taking and holding the ball in tight midfield areas and keeping the play flowing.
Haven't really been impressed by his cameos centrally for England and can't see it suddenly clicking in a major tournament.
What have this team achieved exactly?..
They have got through to the later stages of tournaments by favourable draws, beating B and C level teams, and losing as soon they play anyone half decent.
The only knockout game Southgate has won where he would not have been torn to shreds had we lost was against a very very average Germany side.
But against the other traditional “big” international teams?… France? Lost. Belgium? Lost. Italy? Lost. Croatia? Lost.
The golden generation got knocked out earlier in tournaments, but look at the sides that beat them… France, Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Portugal, etc… really good sides.
Completely agree. He's not a CM, he's an inverted wingback at most where you can exploit those hollywood balls and crosses.
Who do you consider a standout passer than? Which national team has them in abundance?
I legitimately don't know about any of those examples. France is the only squad that is better going into the Euros, regarding how much absurd depth they have they are imo among the best national teams in history right now and they still have plenty of positions that just don't work and have to find makeshift solutions for. Bellingham, Foden not even being mentioned is just weird to me, when they are massively well-rounded players and would obviously start for basically any national team in the world without question.
Portugal squad is all round better than England surely?
They can comfortably put out a World class midfield with structure e.g. Palihinha-Joao Neves-Fernandes so that's every bit if not better than what England will put out and they have more strength in depth with subs like Ruben Neves.
When did Scholes not get in the team? Don't remember that
I'm not sure who does have it in abundance. Germany have kroos, Croatia modric, Spain had many good passers. No idea what the Italy side is like. Netherlands has de Jong.
If only that squad had a GK to save Ronaldinho fluke goal, Seaman was 38 and past it.
England haven't had a world class keeper since Shilton. Even he got done, even though it was handball.
I think England is up there with the best international teams individually. Can't say that was the case in the 00s to be honest. I'd say only France is ahead and mainly because of depth. In terms of potential starting line ups, it's very close between three or four teams, IMO, and England is one of them.
Seaman was very good in the 90s, just a tournament too far.
I do actually think Pickford is a very good tournament keeper generally to make up for his shortcomings over a longer domestic season. You see Ramsdale being easily beaten at his near post and it's not like there are great alternatives.
Back to the 2000s and there was ridiculous depth at CB in those times. Campbell-Ferdinand were brilliant in the 2002 World cup then Terry broke through in the years after and you had Ledley King, Carragher and Woodgate hardly used in that period.
100%. Beckham could only really be deployed one way, and it didn’t suit anyone else.
That generation also lacked pacey direct wide players to allow for a proper 433 though.
We were taking Wright Philips, Sinclair, Vassel, even 16 yr old Walcott to tournaments as wide options.
We could have really done with some Rashford, Saka, Sterling types back then!
Lennon was in the 2006 squad IIRC. Joe Cole I think was sort of deployed as left sided attacker in the front 3. He'd have done far better a decade later with people seeing what Spain were deploying and imitating that. Scored that nice goal v Sweden.
It would've just been better having Gerrard as the roaming right sided attacker with Hargreaves/Carrick-Lampard central and then him coming inside when out of possession.
This is what happened at Liverpool with Benitez playing Mascherano-Alonso central.
I think the balance of that team was simply terrible. You had so many players who wanted to do the extraordinary but few who were really good at executing the basics at a high enough level. England back then was sort of the antithesis of what shortly after became the dominant brand of football.
In a 4-4-2 in 2006?
I just don't see how it can be a glaring weakness then. Apart from Spain none of those teams have a better midfield than England, and those are generally the strongest points of those teams. Spain is obviously an exception, but it does seem like this is the only aspect where they are amazingly stacked.
As amazing as Kroos and Modric are, they obviously have their weaknesses that their teammates have to pick up too.