Ronaldo made a conscious decision to become efficient and entirely goal-centred, not getting involved in play or dangerous positions, allows him to conserve energy and to avoid energy, hence he's played the most games of any outfielder ever. But his style is far less interesting. Efficiency over style, which mirrors a lot of the complains of this thread about lack of entertainers in the game. The first point about boringness, not the second one because he's probably the biggest superstar in the history of the game.
Football is boring and lacks real superstars
- Thread starter Scottynaldinho
- Start date
Both are among my favorite players ever, especially Maradona
I don't see them as a contrast to Guardiola's system. In my opinion, he just provides them with a platform to shine brighter than in a less cohesive team. You can see it best at the greatest individualist of this current era. Messi was at his absolute best under Guardiola because he constantly brought him into situations in real threatening areas where he could make his ability count culminating in the ridiculous 90 goals year. Later on, Messi was still exceptional but he dropped deeper and deeper because he couldn't trust his team mates anymore to progress the ball into the attacking third reliable, so he had to take care of that himself. Or to give another example, Neymar and Mbappe for PSG. In the final, they met a much more cohesive opponent in Bayern Munich Neymar, di Maria and Mbappe still had some amazing individual plays where they outplayed multiple Bayern players but they had to start their dribbles and link up plays at the height of the halfway line because PSG couldn't progress the ball any further than this reliably. In a Guardiola system, they would receive the ball in dangerous areas and with numerical superiority so that they could utilize their abilities more efficiently. IMO it is a real shame that we never saw Neymar under Pep and likely never will.
I mean Ronaldo did so out of necessity, and you’re complaining about what he did as a mid 30’s player to continue impacting games at the highest level with where his body was at.
It’s a bad example, considering for a decade he was one of the greatest entertainers in the world before his knee issues started to sap his agility and forced him to level up more off of the ball. No one idolizes 17/18 Ronaldo, they all idolize the 07/08 showman or the early Madrid Ronaldo that was putting on a montage every week.
But you are making generalizations and predictions out of unique cases here. You use Pep and Foden because there are no other examples. At least not ones at a level that's relevant to this argument
I mostly agree with your takes, although Pep's influence undeniably made players serve the system to an extent not seen before rather than the other way around. And that's a tendency that's been copied a lot with more or less success.
He's got the uncanny ability to select and squeeze the fullest potential of every player at his disposition to the benefit of his system (and mercilessly discard them when they're not up to the task). But more importantly, he recognized that a generational player like Messi couldn't be confined within the boundaries of any system without killing the most precious thing they have to offer. Unpredictability. A somewhat controlled one, working for the sake of his own team, but unpredictability nonetheless.
The more skilled the player, the more freedom he's afforded, although weirdly enough Pep's become more dogmatic about his principles each passing year, despite adapting to the new challenges he's confronted to.
I'm also 100% with you when it comes to "boring" football. It's boring to some because less talented coaches with less talented squads tend to face any Pep team with the intent of surviving rather than winning, trying to close any possible gap. Although I'm certain that the MU fans taking a dump on him would have built him a shrine if he coached their team, given how they desperately hang onto every single manager, even blatant frauds like Ole or Ten Hag, in the irrational hope that they'll bring back the SAF days.
The same could be said about the players they consider to be their current stars, and who are all in all, are just pashun merchants. Bruno Fernandes being the prime example.
Another Maradona or Messi will always pop up one way or another, but it is undeniable that the way football has been played in Europe in the last 10-15 years is heavily weeding out and/or discouraging mavericks. Yamal is an outlier and even if he's a very exciting prospect, time will tell if he reaches the heights of his illustrious predecessors.
Last edited:
On your last point Messi joined Barcelona at 13 which is key, by that time a large part of your football identity has already been formed. He honed most of his primary skills, in Argentina, and joined Barca at an age he could utilise the best of the tactical acumen of the La Masoa coaches.
A Messi that’s grown up at La Masia from the ages of 7-8 like others doesn’t turn out the same imo, he needed that street spontaneous element from playing on the pitches of South America, a Messi who was born and raised in Europe and at an academy like Barca before 10 years age doesn’t turn out the same because he wouldn’t be allowed the allowances he would playing in a country like Argentina.
Yamal is probably as good as it gets but he doesn’t play in the same way Maradona or Messi did, he doesn’t dribble as much or as good, he is very much more a pass orientated player, as opposed to Messi and Maradona who were great passers also but very heavily focused on their dribbling.
I wouldn't attribute that to Pep alone. Mourinho's success predates Guardiola's and the park the bus coaches are rather his spiritual successors than Pep's. But in general, I think much has to do with drastically improved scouting and analytics capabilities as well as increased fitness levels and better tactical education for youth players.
That aside, I don't think modern football is discouraging mavericks nor would I classify the greats of the past as such. When you boil it down, Guardiola is all about space and time, just like Cruyff and that understanding is something almost all great players possess. I'd say that every great player of the past would look better in a Guardiola system. The issue is rather that in modern football, almost all players are expected to work against the ball which might put off somebody like Maradona. But that is probably more down to Klopp and his pressing philosophy than Pep.
I mean, talents like Messi are very rare. There is only a handful of players at best as talented as him since the 50s. But IMO, La Masia has produced many flair players. Many didn't make it, obviously, but they had many very entertaining and technically exceptional ones like Thiago, Halilovic, Fati, Gavi and Yamal, just to name a few. I also like the new bunch of top talents in Europe and South America very much. Wirtz, Musiala, Endrick, Estevao, Duranville, Echeverri, Mastantouno, Gavi, Pedri, Yamal, Simons, Nico Williams, Arda Güler, etc. are super entertaining players. I'm very much looking forward to the witnessing the next generation of football.
Look at this stuff man, brings tears to my eyes:
football lacks players like that now
football lacks players like that now
No one gave me more joy watching football than Ronaldinho. What a player.
I’m telling you, put him in 2024 and tacticos would have questions for why he isn’t tracking back or his pressing numbers are poor.
He was being criticised in 2005 about not tracking back by English pundits. Ruud Gullit was arguing that why would you waste his energy on tracking back when he's so damn good in attack. I recall him saying if he managed him, he would tell him to not come back past the half way line
England's constant disdain for talented flair players, to this day, and worship of headless runners who "put in a shift", will never cease to amaze me.
It explains why the greatest players of all time never felt the need to set a foot in England, and why it never won anything aside from a dodgy WC on home soil 60 years ago.
Last edited:
And the game has only gotten even more cardio based.
Feels like attacking has become far more about winning possession in dangerous areas for easy chances as opposed to actually slicing through a team through quality passing/dribbling/movement. You can have bang average talents up front but if as a team they are constantly getting easy chances to create because of a well executed press you’ll still have good “production” from them even if the eye test says they aren’t anything special.
You have to be that good as 2005 Ronaldinho though to justify it, by the time he went to AC Milan, he was still able to absolutely destroy a defender with an insane trick but he was even lazier and couldn't maintain it over 90 minutes. Those games against United if I remember in the 2010 CL, I remember being scared shitless every time he got the ball in the first half, magic. But United were able to completely overrun Milan and ended up winning 7-2 on aggregate. There's a fine line between being indulged and being worth it and it tipping over the other end.
I don't think the highlights do him justice. Only those who watched him know that he played with the same swagger throughout the 90 minutes and on top of that he wasn't a frustrating player like some of the other flair players.
Don't forget the percentiles.
He was the first player Pep cut when he took over Barcelona. I think this was definitely the end of an era. Football did become more and more heavy on press and players fitting a system once Peps Barcelona team started to dominate world football.
Last edited:
He had been declining very noticeably for almost 2 seasons by then though, he was even visibly out of shape at times.
The only reason why he's not unanimously considered as one of the very best ever (as in top 5/top 10) is that his peak was too short.
Guardiola rather famously tried to keep Dinho at Barcelona actually
There's a few different versions of what happened there.
Barcelona got rid of him and Deco, because they didn't want their off field antics having a negative impact on Messi. Think that came from one of the players at the club.
Or
Pep says he tried to keep him and Ronaldinho says he left because he wanted to leave, he felt he had nothing else to achieve there.
Or
Pep came in and saw what players lacked the discipline to play his way and immediately put down a marker by getting rid of him and Deco.
Ronaldinho achieved everything he wanted to achieve in the game, when he did that, he lost that hunger and desire to be at his very best. By the time he'd left Barca he was dropping off for 2 years.
A bit like George Best, who said he knew football was never going to get any better for him after he won the European cup, this was in the shower right mins after the game. He knew then, it was pretty much all down hill from there. So, he decided to go and get his kicks somewhere else, because football wasn't going to do it for him anymore. Ronaldinho was probably of a similar mindset.
Dinho, Deco and Eto'o were out of the club before Guardiola got the job. It was well documented that Laporta and the rest of the brass saw them as toxic and had decided to get rid of them. Dinho and Deco saw the where the wind was blowing and decided to leave, as they had good offers from Milan and Chelsea. Eto'o made it a point of principle and refused to be forced out, even despite Guardiola's attempts(acting on club orders).
Every party involved mentioned Guardiola making an attempt to keep Dinho at the club, first with Laporta and then Dinho himself
Every party involved mentioned Guardiola making an attempt to keep Dinho at the club, first with Laporta and then Dinho himself
Eto'o of course left the club for Inter in the summer of 2009 as a swap deal for Ibrahimović. Eto'o had just won the treble with Barcelona, and went to Inter and won the treble there. Back to back fecking trebles. An incredible achievement.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/extra/7ruba7shs4/the-slow-death-of-the-screamer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/videos/cdrl4431m47o
I thought this was a really interesting read and that goal of the month for Dec 2006 was incredible.
Linked to everything being driven by data and less room for something risky but if it comes off it'll be amazing.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/videos/cdrl4431m47o
I thought this was a really interesting read and that goal of the month for Dec 2006 was incredible.
Linked to everything being driven by data and less room for something risky but if it comes off it'll be amazing.
Excellent post . How big a factor for Ronaldinhos exit was Pep using Messi as the false 9 and having rapid runners going in behind E.g Eto, Henry then later Villa and Pedro? Can’t see where that would leave Roanldinho. The only role he could be used in would be where Messi was being played.
I recently watched the BBC documentary on Pep and it says the B team beat the first team in a friendly when Pep was manager. Was using he using a false 9 with the B team ? Or was it just a plan he had for Messi when he became manager. Seems like its just as much tactical reason for his exit combined with his partying.
Last edited:
All fair points.
It honestly depends in my opinion. If it's like how Messi was used at Barca and implying the same level of freedom, then definitely.
If it's how Mahrez (yes, I know there's no comparison between him and Messi) was instructed to hug the touch line no matter what, to stretch the opposing back four, which went against his natural tendency to cut inside to take on the fullback, then in my opinion no. Mahrez undeniably became a much better rounded footballer under Pep, but lost quite a bit in terms of creativity. Pep's obssession with not losing the ball, made him much more reluctant to use what was his biggest weapon, his ability to go past any player and create an opening.
You rightly said that the best players have a great understanding of space and time. But this understanding might go against the manager's and you have to compromise.
If a manager makes a player like Maradona track back or put in a constant defensive shift, he's a terrorist who should be arrested and given a life sentence. I honestly don't think that Pep or Klopp would do it. They might tweak his positioning off the ball but would never burn him out. These are players you have to carry because of how decisive they are going forward.
Been an ongoing problem for years. Why the media and rival fans love Gerrard and never took to Scholes . Yet when you hear Xavi , Zidane and Pep talking they all prefer Scholes. Goes back even further my Dad says Glen Hoddle was badly managed with England. Matt Le Tiss is another.
There is talent in this country, but like you said the media and most fans just don’t appreciate or like that type of player.
Last edited:
Good read that, cheers for posting. Those goals were great too!
I did my own research into where shots were taken from 2 or 3 years back and posted it on here somewhere because people were noticing long-range goals being down. Got the stats from whoscored.com if I remember rightly as it breaks down shot position into outside the box, inside the box and 6 yard box. It's been a known thing for a while now.
Interesting to see basketball being mentioned too. In one of the threads this theme was discussed in football in the past, someone posted a shot chart of basketball and how that's changed. From what I remember, the longer-range 2 point attempts have all but been eliminated, and more of the 3 point attempts are attempted from central positions on the court as a percentage. Think it was all heavily data driven. Makes sense for basketball, why try a riskier 2 point attempt when you can be a step or two further back and get 3? Everything is very uniform now.
The increase in data usage has played a big part in all sports in my opinion.
We've always had people complain that football wasn't like it used to be. There's always been dads, uncles, grandfathers saying the same. I don't know if we're just grumpy old men now, or if it's simply natural evolution of sport. As time passes people develop greater understanding of what works and what doesn't, and things simply become more efficient. That's true of everything, not just football or sport in general. More effciency leads to less risk taking and often less variety in terms of approach.
Technically the sport and teams are getting better all the time but it can be at the cost of entertainment. Fewer awe-inspiring monets and even though teams to their best to feck up playing out from the back at times, fewer 'mistakes', especially from an attacking perspective. Teams not shooting from long-range, fewer risky passes/dribbles etc.
There's hope in football because there can always be the possibility of some huge disruptor in tactics finding a way to overcome the pep clones but in general I think the game is just going to become more and more efficient in that way as time progresses.
As long as it doesn't get so stale that kids stop watching it doesn't matter if there's less flair or individualism from the point of view of popularity. We're not at that point at all although I've seen some posters on here posit that fewer kids watch full games now, only tuning in to highlights or to watch goals. I don't know if that's true.
I'm sort of the middle. I do get less entertainment from football now in sense of having pure unadulterated fun, but I also like well-drilled tactics, stats and data. It depends which head I have on at any given moment as to how I'm feeling about it all.
On a side note, and I relate this to football too. I've had an interest in poker for about 20 years now. The players are very much more efficient now too with a greater understanding of statstics. Hold 'em has been 'solved' with the advancement in computing technology and a way to play that was completely unexploitable discovered. It's impossible for the human mind the emulate that style of play perfectly but nearly everyone who is serious about the game these days puts in some time to learn this game theory optimal style of play before making individual adjustments to their opponents. That's your baseline and you exploit players from there who deviate. There's a lot less varied or wilder playing styles now.
Everything eventually will follow suit. I used to find F1 exciting when I was a kid, but then that a got a bit boring, the efficency of Schumacher etc. and changes in the rules. I remember in snooker people used to love Jimmy White in comparison to the much more machine-like Stephen Hendry as he'd take on riskier shots and play a bit less safe.
Edit: As an afterthought, it's all not all sports that suffered with this. Cricket used to be dour back in the day, way more exciting in the modern era. Teams and players actually worked out that big hitting was a superior tactic and bat-making technology changed with this. Tennis has probably had it's greatest ever era in the men's game after serve-volley went out of style which was a bit boring, but they had to change the balls to do that.
Last edited: