Remake Draft Finals | Tuppet vs Gio

Please vote for the better remake of the classical set-up


  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .

Joga Bonito

The Art of Football
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
8,270
Voters are asked to consider the XIs featured as remakes of classic teams, and to consider to what extent the manager has succeeded in re-creating both the individual roles and the overall functionality of the original. THIS IS NOT A FANTASY MATCH BETWEEN TWO SIDES, but rather a comparison of remakes.

Please feel free to tag the managers if you require more information about their set-ups/players etc.


Team Tuppet
Philosophy/Ideology of Tactical set-up

Much like the grande Inter our team is built on the principles of a team effort and strong work ethic, Organization is of prime importance. Catenaccio predicated itself on always having a spare man in defense. It accomplished this by using man-marking; each Inter player knew who he was meant to be keeping tabs on in his half of the field. The spare man was the sweeper, for those Inter teams, Armando Picchi, cleaning up anyone who slipped their marker long enough to provide a threat.

Offensively the idea is to stay deep, soak the pressure, win the ball back in their half and launch the ball forward with speed and directness. Directness is the key here and this along with the ability to play the counter attacking system has weighed heavily in my picks.

Style
-
Counter attacking, Direct, Long passes. Defend deep as a team and employ a lot of time wasting when leading.

Defensive line - Deep. Di Stéfano described Picchi to Lowe as - “one of those sweepers who played so deep that, if there was a bit of fog and you thought you’d gone past all of them, another one would appear. ‘Where did that guy come from? Are they playing with 12, or what?

This is exactly how I want my sweeper (Carvalho) to play.

Marking - Strictly man marking with a free sweeper.

Off the ball - Drop deep to own half, with each man sticking to his player, while the free sweeper stays further back to provide last line of defense. Win the ball with tough tackling.

On the ball - Pump the ball into the box with long passes from deep and direct runs.

Player roles:

Goalkeeper – David De gea

Since in Catenaccio we are already playing with a very deep defensive line and a designated sweeper we don't need a sweeper keeper. What we need is a keeper who can save long shots, someone who can get to the firecrackers ripped from long-range by teams frustrated by our deep defending and marking. Dave is lanky and quick with probably the best reflexes in business, and he has been making miraculous saves on a daily basis and so he gets the nod.

Sweeper – Ricardo Carvalho


The problem with choosing a purely defensive sweeper (as opposed to an attack-minded sweeper, like Scirea or Beckenbauer) is either the absence of qualified candidates or the preponderance of them. Few teams play with a true sweeper anymore, and usually only as part of a three-man defense. But on the other hand, as has been written about in too many places to cite any one of them, all center-backs today play to an extent as sweepers, with one dropping to provide cover as the other moves forward to engage the ball.

Carvalho, however, fits the characteristics we’re looking for — he’s great with ball and intelligent in his positioning — and has actually played in a pretty deep defensive line in one of the best counterattacking teams of current era, and was part of one of the best defensive partnership in premiership.

Left Fullback – Marcelo


The knock on Marcelo is obviously his defensive ability. He is actually not that bad and put consistently good performances for Real, but he is prone to having an occasional brainfart on the field. However there is no question on his offensive contribution, as he is probably the best offensive left back of current era.

Since Facchetti is impossible to replicate, we had to make compromises in some of the attributes. As Herrera himself placed a large importance on the attacking capabilities of his left back that is what we have decided to prioritize.

The problem is that most of the ones who copied me copied me wrongly. They forgot to include the attacking principles that my Catenaccio included. I had Picchi as a sweeper, yes, but I also had Facchetti, the first full-back to score as many goals as a forward.” - Herrera

In this Marcelo is the ideal man for this job. Giacinto Facchetti was a big, fast attacking fullback who scored 75 total goals during his Inter career. He got up the line to provide width in attack and got back to mark the opponent’s tornante. Marcelo's got the speed for that, plus the crossing ability to provide the width, plus the knack for goal-scoring.

Center Defender – Pepe


Ideally catenaccio should be a system that’s not just difficult to play against, but that opponents despise playing against. While some (esp Herrara himself) would argue that there was fair amount of attacking in catenaccio (and there was), there is no denying that there was a deep cynicism and win at any cost mentality with this system.
One of great catenaccio proponent Milan’s coach Rocco is said to have told his team before a match:
“Kick anything that moves; if it’s the ball, so much the better.”
Oh how would they have loved to have Pepe.

Pepe’s like a professional wrestling heel; his ability to draw heat and being the pantomime villain is astonishing.What gets lost sometime in his forward hacking, dive acting and general cuntishness though, is that he is pretty damn good defender. 2 times champions league winner, twice selected in Euro team of the tournament, Pepe gives us the right combination of strength, aerial ability, and ruthlessness to be our left-central defender. He is also the standout performer in a final reaching Portugal team in current Euro tournament.

Center-Right Defender – Carles Puyol


One of the interesting wrinkles of Herrera’s system is the narrow positioning of its right back, a player who is literally a center-right defender. This was important in the Serie A of that period, because the dominant formation called for a winger on the right side — Jair Da Costa for Inter — but no corresponding presence on the left. So defenses shifted away from that part of the pitch to fill in gaps in more dangerous areas.

It’s an interesting concept to consider in modern times, with the profusion of inverted wingers looking to cut inside onto their stronger foot. Some coaches have dealt with this by playing left-footed players on the right side of the defense (or vice versa). For us, we have someone comfortable both in the center and on the right coming out from the middle of the field to meet them as they cut inside.

Puyol is the man for the job because he meets both our positional requirements, and because he’s got the speed to slide out and cover the right flank when that’s needed. Since catenaccio calls for man-marking, he can play further out on the right in a four-man defense when needed, or slide in and become the second center back in a three-man defense.

Defensive Midfielder – Javier Mascherano


Fortunately for Mascherano, he doesn’t have to master off the ball movement and one-touch passing in this system. All we’re asking him to do is stick to the opposing playmaker and make him pay every time he touches the ball. I have faith he could handle that.

Regista – Juan Sebastian Veron


I have spent quite a bit of time defending Andrea Pirlo for this role in last few games, and I still believe that a peak Pirlo is probably the best fit for a deep lying playmaker in a deep siting, counter attacking team.

However the error of my thinking is that I am not creating just any Catenaccio team, but a very specific team - Grande Inter. And my Regista is always going to be compared to Inter's Luis Suarez, so its probably better to give up slightly on tactical fit to get a better player remake.

This search for a deep-lying playmaker to replace Inter’s Luis Suarez has two names at the top of the list: Iniesta and Veron. Iniesta because he is probably the most similar player to Suarez by his own admission. The problem is that his peak IMO is as a left sided attacking midfielder. He also never played in a counter attacking team or in a role where he consistently has to release pressure from deep and find an attacker with long ball.

I think I got lucky that Iniesta got blocked since going from Pirlo to Iniesta would have been going to other extreme, a better player remake but a lesser tactical fit. Veron actually provides a happy medium, as he combines defensive sturdiness, box to box ability, silky playmaking, immaculate long distance passing and ability to score goals. Because of the distance between our defensive and attacking central midfielders, our regista’s not always going to have the option of playing the easy pass forward through the opponent’s midfield. Veron has escape artist instincts and the ability to take the ball around, through, or over pressure, which will help buy him time to play his killer long passes to our target forward or breaking flank players.
 
Tornante – Alexis Sanchez

Inter used Jair here and like Jair, Alexis is right footed, right forward who can play centrally as well. Like Jair, Sanchez is lightning fast, a great dribbler and made like a bull. Jair played like a right sided target man, while he did his fair share of tracking back, his major role was to be a target for Suarez's pin point passes and tracking back somewhat, Sanchez is more or less perfect for this role.

Left wing / Mid — Angel Di Maria

Mario Corso is described as a left footed left winger who would come inside. Di maria is similarly left footed and can play as a left winger or left sided midfielder. Corso was a very unique combination of playmaker and winger and Di Maria provides us both. He is also a hell of a hard worker, which is a very useful trait as most of our squad would be focused on defending. Internet is littered with Di Maria clips, but here is one of the better ones showing his playmaking capabilities -

Deep Forward – Luis Suarez

Between Veron and Di Maria, we don’t really need a deep forward who’s going to unlock opposing defenses with his passes. Instead, we’ll go for one who can cause havoc with his runs, drawing defenders out of position then finishing himself or finding the open man with simple balls back or across the goal.

Plus, how could we possibly pass up the chance to put modern Luis Suarez on the team that the original starred for, albeit from a different position?

Center Forward – Ronaldo

Not much to say here, Ronaldo is the most obvious upgrade I could have got in the whole set up. With our tactic chances are usually going to be few and far in between and we need forward who can put every half chance to back of the net. Ronaldo is the best there is for this job, his frightening speed and dribbling means he is a perfect forward for any counter attacking team.

Original-Inter-formation-tactics.png
Inter-Remade-formation-tactics.png


Inter Milan 1964/Helenio Herrera (1-3-4-2)
........................................../..........................Tuppet's Modern Remake
 
Last edited:
Team Gio

Philosophy/Ideology of Tactical Set-Up

No generation was as golden as Hungary's Golden Team that dominated international football in the early 1950s. The Magical Magyars were a step ahead of their peers: shaking off the shackles of the WM formation to unleash a 3-2-1-4 / 4-2-4 hybrid that bamboozled the world. At the heart of Gusztav Sebes' system was the deep-lying centre-forward, initially developed by MTK coach Martin Bukovi, whose positioning, ability to dictate play and overload in and beyond the hole was central to the Magyars' sustained success.

Style - Fluid, ball dominating and on the front foot
Defense - High line organised by a centre-half-cum-sweeper who builds play from deep. Combination of man and zonal marking as the situation dictates. Look to win the ball back early to carry on attacking.
Midfield - Classy and imposing: look to dominate and circulate the ball with superior technique. Uses Lahm as an overload down the right.
Attack - Fluid: intelligent through the middle and swashbuckling on the flanks

Player Roles

Claudio Bravo - good on the ball and shines with a high line. Grosics: "There was space behind our defence and I had to act as a kind of extra sweeper outside of my area".
Alessandro Nesta - immaculate all-round defender
Philipp Lahm - all-round full-back, defensively robust, supports attack in possession
Giorgio Chiellini - prototype rock-solid central-defender-cum-left-back
Daniele De Rossi - defensive-left-central presence to anchor midfield, dropping into defence when required.
Marco Verratti - ball-playing central midfielder who can also mix it.
Francesco Totti - the modern game's first false nine plays the role of the withdrawn centre-forward
Raul - left-footed support striker, expert finisher, dovetailing off a more physical line-leader
Miroslav Klose - aerially powerful centre-forward
Arjen Robben - free-roaming, heavy goalscoring, left-footed winger
Joaquin - touchline-hugging, full-back-ripping, dribble-and-cross merchant

Specific Tactical Manoeuvres
  • Totti is the heartbeat: he drops into the hole between defence and midfield, sprays passes and supports the attack. Grosics: "Whoever was in this deep-lying position had to co-ordinate the whole team's strategy from behind the attack." Higedkuti: "If I went forward, Puskas dropped back".
  • De Rossi can drop to make a more conventional back four as shown by his central defensive performances in Euro 2012 in particular. Szepesi: "Part of Sebes genius was for Zakarias to drop back to liberate the rest of the midfield - Hidegkuti in particular - to attack."
  • Midfield pivots on the De Rossi/Verratti axis with Verratti freed up to support the attack in possession.
  • In possession Lahm opens up onto the right flank. Hidegkuti: "Our right-back Buzansky advanced down the wing - nobody was expecting a right-back overlapping his winger in those days, so you always had someone free to pass to."
  • As in the 1953 'match of the century' against England, Robben and Joaquin play slightly deeper to work the flank. Sebes: "I wanted the wingers to drop back when necessary to assist the defence"
  • Joaquin gets on the ball, dribbles it forward, slings crosses into Klose. Budai: "Czibor, Kocsis and I trained together for years, just working on our crossing."
  • Robben has the freedom to roam across the line and his team-mates will adapt to fill the space he has vacated. Puskas: "If Czibor wandered to the right wing, Budai would drop deeper. If Czibor decided to spend most of the game on the right wing, I would pull to the left to compensate".
 
mag_copy-formation-tactics.png
mag_copy-formation-tactics.png


Hungary 1953/Sebes (3-2-1-4)................................................/..........................Gio's Modern Remake
 
@Tuppet i didn't mind Pirlo there too much .

@Gio i feel chiellini is too big a name for that position and I liked kaladze there . I don't know much about your team though to be fair but I don't think lantos was a world beater ?
 
Yeah I din't mind Pirlo there as well, TBH any of Xavi, Iniesta, Pirlo, Veron, Modric would work. If we go down on quality ladder the likes of Herrara, Wilshere, Ramsey etc are also ok-ish choices in the first round. But even if it is marginal, Veron is a bit better remake of Suarez, which might be deciding in final where margins are slim.
 
On Gio's excellent remake I have have no serious objections, so I'll just start with a nit pick to get the discussions going - Bozsik/Verratti.
Bozsik from what I've read about was arguably the finest deep lying playmaker in football. From the excellent InBedWithMaradona website -
Arguably the finest deep lying playmaker in football history was Hungary’s stellar right-half, Jozsef Bozsik. When the Magical Magyars are fondly remembered, it is often for the goalscoring exploits of Sandor Kocsis, the tactical innovations of Peter Palotas and Nandor Hidegkuti, and the all round brilliance of Ferenc Puskas. The result is that the metronomic qualities of Bozsik are frequently overlooked.
- http://inbedwithmaradona.com/journal/2012/10/17/the-peerless-jozsef-bozsik.html

Verratti on the other hand seems to me as a ball playing defensive midfielder. He is more combative, a good ball winner and is a neat passer. But I would have taken a more traditional deep lying playmaker like Alonso. The reasoning would be both ability and style. While Verratti is hot property right now, he is young and would probably go on to have a great career. But there are more accomplished playmakers available in the pool who would have been more apt to replace one of the greatest deep lying playmaker in history of game. The other reason is I don't think there playing style are exactly same either, there are similarities ofcourse, but again there are probably other players who would probably be more apt for this. So I would like to hear more on Gio's reasoning on picking him.
 
Both Tuppet and Gio have built excellent sides here, and both looked very likely to be strong favourites in going to the final with their strong initial drafting.

It's not that easy to pick between them, but for me, Gio's remake is closer than Tuppet's. The reason may sound a bit stupid, but I feel that Marcelo in Facchetti's role is a bad fit, overall. Sure, Facchetti was famous for being one of the first attacking full backs who was a huge threat going forward, but Facchetti was also quite solid defensively, and he had to be to play in Herrera's Catenaccio. It does sound quite nitpicky, but in a final with two such well-built remakes, it's these small differences that make the difference to me.

Gio doesn't have as much of a discrepancy in his remake. Almost all of his picks are quite good. Klose still seems sort of an awkward Kocsis remake, but it isn't as bad as Marcelo for Facchetti, IMO. Klose may not be as good on the ball, but style-wise and in terms of his goalscoring ability and movement, overall, Klose fits quite well, whilst with Marcelo-Facchetti, Marcelo doesn't even come close to being defensively capable enough for Herrera's Catenaccio.
 
Verratti on the other hand seems to me as a ball playing defensive midfielder. He is more combative, a good ball winner and is a neat passer. But I would have taken a more traditional deep lying playmaker like Alonso.
It's interesting that you describe him like that because, if you twist the reasoning/nitpicking approach differently, you can also describe Xabi Alonso as a ball-playing defensive midfielder. In fact, I would say that Verratti and Xabi Alonso are both very similar in terms of their playing style and footballing attributes.

I will also add that Boszik wasn't a purely passive playmaker like Didi was. He was more tenacious and combative than many seem to make him, and relatively speaking, he isn't as much of a luxury player as Didi was (again, relative comparisons, not absolute). Overall, Verratti, may be tenacious, aggressive, and a good ball winner, but that doesn't make him less of a playmaker.
 
Both Tuppet and Gio have built excellent sides here, and both looked very likely to be strong favourites in going to the final with their strong initial drafting.

It's not that easy to pick between them, but for me, Gio's remake is closer than Tuppet's. The reason may sound a bit stupid, but I feel that Marcelo in Facchetti's role is a bad fit, overall. Sure, Facchetti was famous for being one of the first attacking full backs who was a huge threat going forward, but Facchetti was also quite solid defensively, and he had to be to play in Herrera's Catenaccio. It does sound quite nitpicky, but in a final with two such well-built remakes, it's these small differences that make the difference to me.

Gio doesn't have as much of a discrepancy in his remake. Almost all of his picks are quite good. Klose still seems sort of an awkward Kocsis remake, but it isn't as bad as Marcelo for Facchetti, IMO. Klose may not be as good on the ball, but style-wise and in terms of his goalscoring ability and movement, overall, Klose fits quite well, whilst with Marcelo-Facchetti, Marcelo doesn't even come close to being defensively capable enough for Herrera's Catenaccio.
I agree with you, in the sense that Marcelo / Facchetti is easily the worst remake out of both teams, I would love to hear who would you replace him with though. I have already noted that Marcelo is not on the same level defensively as Facchetti, but I believe that Facchetti's attacking prowess were more important to the Inter team than his defending. Again Marcelo/Facchetti is not the best remake but I would blame it to the luck of draw in drawing team and the pool.
 
It's interesting that you describe him like that because, if you twist the reasoning/nitpicking approach differently, you can also describe Xabi Alonso as a ball-playing defensive midfielder. In fact, I would say that Verratti and Xabi Alonso are both very similar in terms of their playing style and footballing attributes.

I will also add that Boszik wasn't a purely passive playmaker like Didi was. He was more tenacious and combative than many seem to make him, and relatively speaking, he isn't as much of a luxury player as Didi was (again, relative comparisons, not absolute). Overall, Verratti, may be tenacious, aggressive, and a good ball winner, but that doesn't make him less of a playmaker.
I guess we'll agree to disagree on that, but from whatever I've seen of Verratti (and I'll admit that its not a lot) he doesn't came across as a classic playmaker type. Again its a nit pick but even if you believe that Verratti and Alonso are very similar, there is a difference in there ability at peak (Verratti's peak is probably still to come), I would have chosen a more decorated player to play one of history's greatest midfielder, just because there are so many available in the pool.
 
I agree with you, in the sense that Marcelo / Facchetti is easily the worst remake out of both teams, I would love to hear who would you replace him with though. I have already noted that Marcelo is not on the same level defensively as Facchetti, but I believe that Facchetti's attacking prowess were more important to the Inter team than his defending. Again Marcelo/Facchetti is not the best remake but I would blame it to the luck of draw in drawing team and the pool.
I see what you mean, and I agree with that statement myself in that, since Corso was almost a second central attacking player in the team, Facchetti was pretty much a hybrid of a left winger and traditional left full back. However, whilst you may value his attacking contributions highly, what I value highly in Facchetti is how he was equally effective going forward as he was in his defending.

If I had to pick a player to replicate Facchetti here (based on what I value), it would have to be one of Alaba, Ashley Cole, Evra, or Capdevila. All four were equally effective going forward and in their defending. (Cole may be a controversial choice for some, but I highly rate his attacking game from my observations. Same goes for Evra, who was a left winger during his time at Monaco!)

So, in summary, for me, I value the balance and completeness in Facchetti's game rather than just one aspect. For me, Marcelo doesn't offer enough defensively to replicate the balance that Facchetti demonstrated.
 
I would have chosen a more decorated player to play one of history's greatest midfielder, just because there are so many available in the pool.
I agree with that simply because a more decorated player would be an easier sell, but if we look past that point and just focus on the players' attributes, style of play, and overall football game, then in my eyes, Verratti is a great replica of Bozsik.

Out of curiosity, if you see Verratti as how you see him, do you think that he'd be a great Toninho replica instead? I'm just curious because P-Nut and I weren't really considering him for the Toninho role.
 
I agree with that simply because a more decorated player would be an easier sell, but if we look past that point and just focus on the players' attributes, style of play, and overall football game, then in my eyes, Verratti is a great replica of Bozsik.

Out of curiosity, if you see Verratti as how you see him, do you think that he'd be a great Toninho replica instead? I'm just curious because P-Nut and I weren't really considering him for the Toninho role.
I think he would make a pretty good Falcao, and I don't think Alonso would make a good Falcao at all. He would do a pretty good job as Cerezo though, esp since Cerezo was a fine playmaker himself, just that there are others who are probably better fit for that.
 
I see what you mean, and I agree with that statement myself in that, since Corso was almost a second central attacking player in the team, Facchetti was pretty much a hybrid of a left winger and traditional left full back. However, whilst you may value his attacking contributions highly, what I value highly in Facchetti is how he was equally effective going forward as he was in his defending.

If I had to pick a player to replicate Facchetti here (based on what I value), it would have to be one of Alaba, Ashley Cole, Evra, or Capdevila. All four were equally effective going forward and in their defending. (Cole may be a controversial choice for some, but I highly rate his attacking game from my observations. Same goes for Evra, who was a left winger during his time at Monaco!)

So, in summary, for me, I value the balance and completeness in Facchetti's game rather than just one aspect. For me, Marcelo doesn't offer enough defensively to replicate the balance that Facchetti demonstrated.
I think everybody prefers a balanced player, there is no doubt about it. But tactically if you think what was his role in Grande Inter, you'll see that his attacking prowess was so much more important to them. He played like a forward from deep, its his awesomeness that he was still very good at defending but he was very much an attacking player for the team.

I think you are underestimating how important his attacking was for the team. Here are two people who knows more about the system than anyone else talking about Herrera's role -

Helenio Herrera said:
The problem is that most of the ones who copied me copied me wrongly. They forgot to include the attacking principles that my Catenaccio included. I had Picchi as a sweeper, yes, but I also had Facchetti, the first full-back to score as many goals as a forward.

Sandro Mazzola said:
We had five attacking players in the side, six if you include Facchetti, who used to get forward a lot, something that no one else did at the time.

And this is the opposition point of view -
Prior to the final, Miguel Muñoz, the Madrid coach, had obsessed about Facchetti. “He drove us mad with Facchetti, giving him an incredible importance,” Di Stéfano said, according to Lowe. “Anyone would think he was [Paco] Gento.“

It also make tactical sense, since we have 3 central defenders, naturally the left back would act much more like a wing back. His attacking prowess was a very potent weapon for Inter, as provinding a counter attacking outlet. Out of the players you have listed, I disagree on Cole, right of the bat. Yeah he was a bit attacking in his Arsenal days, he was nowhere near playing a wing back role, esp in his peak at Chelsea. Evra is slightly better shout, as he did tend to go up and down the pitch quite a bit, but the biggest knock on him was his lack of end product. Compare this to Facchetti, who had almost 60 goals and countless assists. Both Cole and Evra also played with wingers who have worked hard to support them. There is no way I would replace Facchetti with them, even though overall they are both better players than Marcelo. Now Marcelo has a respectable record at goals and assists, has played with an almost forward and highly attacking CR7 in front of him and provides the much needed thrust from left side for the tactic to work. Without Marcelo the tactic would become too central or lopsided and the counter attacking threat (which is the primary threat in this tactic) would be far reduced.
 
I quite like the Di Maria - Silva swap
 
Two of the best teams right from the start so definitely a worthy final in that sense - although it has to be said that I'm not a massive fan of either upgrade personally.

I prefer it when managers stick to their guns as opposed to following the criticisms of other voters. Pirlo in the Suarez role has brought Tuppet to the final so it's a shame he is missing out and I thought Tuppet made some great arguments on why it works.

For Gio Chiellini looks fine enough but I'm surprised Bozsik wasn't upgraded - Veratti is an excellent young player but I don't think he yet has the clout or experience to fill the role of Bozsik, given his status as one of the best midfielders of all time and the core of that Hungarian side.

One issue for Tuppet is that his actual formation isn't as aesthetically pleasing as Gio's - the two midfielders in particular look weird. Obviously he has no control over that and has to work with the template.
 
Going for Tuppet. Veron as Suarez makes a lot more sense to me- he's a great fit and the player I would have chosen to replace him in this draft. I also think Marcelo makes quite a bit of sense given the qualities required for the system.

As with others Veratti isn't an ideal replacement for Bozsik and the drop in quality between Klose and Kocsis is too large for my liking.
 
It's interesting that you describe him like that because, if you twist the reasoning/nitpicking approach differently, you can also describe Xabi Alonso as a ball-playing defensive midfielder. In fact, I would say that Verratti and Xabi Alonso are both very similar in terms of their playing style and footballing attributes.

I will also add that Boszik wasn't a purely passive playmaker like Didi was. He was more tenacious and combative than many seem to make him, and relatively speaking, he isn't as much of a luxury player as Didi was (again, relative comparisons, not absolute). Overall, Verratti, may be tenacious, aggressive, and a good ball winner, but that doesn't make him less of a playmaker.
Yes. The challenge with Bozsik was securing someone who excelled on the ball but who was also capable of getting stuck in, holding a midfield two, and acting as a physical presence. If it was purely about quality, Xavi would have been my go-to guy there as they bring similar quality to the table, were positionally reasonably similar and stood out in possession. But where Xavi would fall short in a pure tactical remake - which is after all what this draft is all about - was his physicality off the ball. He had a fantastic engine, pressed energetically, but never really imposed himself with his strength and physicality in the way that Bozsik did. As for the Alonso suggestion, again not bad, but he tended to operate deeper, play more as a 6 rather than an 8, which is more how I'd describe Bozsik for Hungary at that time. Verratti was ultimately the best stylistic match in the pool.
 
@Tuppet i didn't mind Pirlo there too much .

@Gio i feel chiellini is too big a name for that position and I liked kaladze there . I don't know much about your team though to be fair but I don't think lantos was a world beater ?
Chiellini is a straightforward upgrade on Kaladze. Lantos was decent, no mug, often came forward for set-pieces and scored the odd goal. I've brought him in for two reasons. First, as another Italian who fits seamlessly into the back three / back four hybrid role - so that gels together well. Second, such a gung-ho team as the Hungarians, who constantly overloaded going forward, need a very capable defence to play such attacking football. My remake can throw the kitchen sink at the opposition safe in the knowledge that the likes of Nesta and Chiellini have it sorted at the back.
 
As for Kocsis and Klose, I think that's one of the best fits on the park. Kocsis and Klose were incredible in the air and based so much of their game on getting on the end of crosses. Kocsis scored over 400 career goals with his head. There is no other striker in the pool who has Klose's aerial ability and can replicate that very unique quality. They were both exceptional at World Cups and, while Kocsis is some distance better in the all-time stakes, Klose is as good a fit as is possible here. It could have been tempting to lump in a big name up top, but again it's not really what this draft is all about.
 
As for Kocsis and Klose, I think that's one of the best fits on the park.

Completely agree. It's an excellent fit. In order to upgrade Klose you'd need to come up with a player who's better allround but who's still an aerial specialist (and a player whose heading ability is just about his best and most prominent feature).
 
As for Verratti, yes – ideally you'd want someone more experienced, a top, top player in his prime. But does he exist in this pool? I think you have to make some stylistic sacrifices there which aren't worth it.

The idea was always to prioritize the system over individual quality. Don't get me wrong, it's a reasonable point to make: It's the final, so if there was a central midfielder in the reinforcement pool that could be called an upgrade (even a slight one) on Verratti, that should count against Gio here – but I can't say with certainty that this is the case. There are better players, but they aren't better fits.
 
As for Verratti, yes – ideally you'd want someone more experienced, a top, top player in his prime. But does he exist in this pool? I think you have to make some stylistic sacrifices there which aren't worth it.

The idea was always to prioritize the system over individual quality. Don't get me wrong, it's a reasonable point to make: It's the final, so if there was a central midfielder in the reinforcement pool that could be called an upgrade (even a slight one) on Verratti, that should count against Gio here – but I can't say with certainty that this is the case. There are better players, but they aren't better fits.

I think it depends to an extent on how highly you rate Veratti and his ability to dictate the game consistently at the very highest level - which is obviously what Bozsik is ultimately all about. For me he's an excellent prospect but I think it's a push to have him replicate arguably the most demanding role on the park given his lack of credentials and experience so early in his career.

In terms of the stylistic fit, the actual quality of the player obviously plays a huge role in that and that's where Verratti IMO isn't as good a fit as Alonso, Xavi, Modric etc. I don't think Verratti has reached the level of a peak De Rossi yet and IMO he would be a better fit - that's probably the most controversial shout of the ones mentioned but De Rossi was always an excellent passer, defensively solid, physically strong but lacking in pace, as well as being mentally very strong/aggressive which Gio seems to have prioritised here.
 
peak De Rossi yet and IMO he would be a better fit - that's probably the most controversial shout of the ones mentioned but De Rossi was always an excellent passer, defensively solid, physically strong but lacking in pace, as well as being mentally very strong/aggressive which Gio seems to have prioritised here.
I was quite sure that Gio picked him as Bozsik's replacement when I just saw the pick.
 
In terms of the stylistic fit, the actual quality of the player obviously plays a huge role in that and that's where Verratti IMO isn't as good a fit as Alonso, Xavi, Modric etc.

Yes, I agree with that. But that doesn't come into play in this context unless there's a glaring discrepancy: If Verratti had been a sheer novice who had only shown glimpses so far, it would've been a problem. He isn't that, though – he's a well established player. Lacking in experience and overall quality, clearly, compared to those you mention – but that's just one factor in the equation.

With both Xavi and Alonso there's too much difference in terms of both how they play (off-the-ball characteristics, as Gio mentions) and where they play. Modric and De Rossi (for different reasons) might've been interesting choices, but I don't see either as a clear improvement. Which means - yes - that I rate Verratti very highly. If one doesn't, I can see the issue - of course.
 
If it was purely about quality, Xavi would have been my go-to guy there as they bring similar quality to the table, were positionally reasonably similar and stood out in possession. But where Xavi would fall short in a pure tactical remake - which is after all what this draft is all about - was his physicality off the ball. He had a fantastic engine, pressed energetically, but never really imposed himself with his strength and physicality in the way that Bozsik did.

Sorry for going on about it but I don't agree with this at all.

In terms of their position on the pitch, technical ability, passing ability, ability to control a game, their leadership and their role in the team Xavi is a fantastic match up for Bozsik and IMO the most natural fit in the pool along with probably Alonso. I can't see how all of that falls down because Xavi doesn't use his 'strength and physicality' defensively.

Was that really such a massive part of Bozsik's game? Surely when people think of Bozsik they think of his technical qualities as opposed to anything he brought defensively. It's not as if Xavi falls down here either as he was absolutely fantastic defensively and had one of the best defensive work rates of any midfielder in the draft.

I can understand that he's a different build to Bozsik and wouldn't utilise physical strength in the same way, but Verratti is 5 ft 5 so doesn't match Bozsik here either. Not that it would be very important if he did as physical strength is surely one of the least important attributes to try and replicate in the Hungarian.
 
To add some balance I think Totti, Raul and Klose were some of the best picks in the entire draft - three swift picks which match wonderfully well in terms of style to the Hungarian front line, which has the potential to be a massive challenge.
 
Sorry for going on about it but I don't agree with this at all.

In terms of their position on the pitch, technical ability, passing ability, ability to control a game, their leadership and their role in the team Xavi is a fantastic match up for Bozsik and IMO the most natural fit in the pool along with probably Alonso. I can't see how all of that falls down because Xavi doesn't use his 'strength and physicality' defensively.

Was that really such a massive part of Bozsik's game? Surely when people think of Bozsik they think of his technical qualities as opposed to anything he brought defensively. It's not as if Xavi falls down here either as he was absolutely fantastic defensively and had one of the best defensive work rates of any midfielder in the draft.

I can understand that he's a different build to Bozsik and wouldn't utilise physical strength in the same way, but Verratti is 5 ft 5 so doesn't match Bozsik here either. Not that it would be very important if he did as physical strength is surely one of the least important attributes to try and replicate in the Hungarian.
I get all that. But a couple of points to explain the thinking. Firstly, that Hungary effectively played a two-man midfield in an era when the middle of the park was a bit of a warzone. It was crucial that midfielders were able to handle themselves (in the same way that almost all stoppers and centre-forwards were big agricultural brutes). Verratti may be 5ft 5' but he's a wee terrier, an all-rounder and is one of the finest ball-playing central midfielders out there. It's a long time since I've seen that midfield three of PSG outclassed and he's the beating heart of all of it. Secondly, if Verratti falls short of Bozsik's almost unparalleled ability on the ball, his nearby midfielders in De Rossi and Totti bring a bit more to the playmaking table than Zakarias and Hidegkuti. If we consider that as a unit, then there is a similar level of creation, influence and possession (relatively speaking) to the Hungarian trio. That's not to downplay either Hidegkuti or Zakarias, but simply to recognise the quality of both Totti in particular and De Rossi and what they bring to the overall mix.

Where I agree Theon is that there remains some paranoia regarding picking Xavi in these drafts. That he was basically unpicked here, then benched, was indicative of both his uniqueness but also a concern, rightly or wrongly, that he might not replicate some of the greats very well. I always had Verratti in mind for that role, but Xavi was a fallback and I'm surprised he didn't get selected for a couple of the other playmaking gigs to be honest.
 
I get all that. But a couple of points to explain the thinking. Firstly, that Hungary effectively played a two-man midfield in an era when the middle of the park was a bit of a warzone. It was crucial that midfielders were able to handle themselves (in the same way that almost all stoppers and centre-forwards were big agricultural brutes). Verratti may be 5ft 5' but he's a wee terrier, an all-rounder and is one of the finest ball-playing central midfielders out there. It's a long time since I've seen that midfield three of PSG outclassed and he's the beating heart of all of it.

Secondly, if Verratti falls short of Bozsik's almost unparalleled ability on the ball, his nearby midfielders in De Rossi and Totti bring a bit more to the playmaking table than Zakarias and Hidegkuti. If we consider that as a unit, then there is a similar level of creation, influence and possession (relatively speaking) to the Hungarian trio. That's not to downplay either Hidegkuti or Zakarias, but simply to recognise the quality of both Totti in particular and De Rossi and what they bring to the overall mix.

I can understand both of those points but I don't think they are overly influential and it wouldn't change my assessment (not that it matters given the score). As stated above the most important qualities of Bozsik to replicate are his technical/passing abilities, his ability to consistently control football matches at the highest level and his leadership qualities and role in the team. In those respects I think Verratti falls down to quite a few midfielders, but primarily Xavi and Alonso who IMO were both better fits amongst others.
 
To add some criticism too, you could say that a point in favour of Xavi – in particular – is what I've banged on about in other matches, viz. replicating the “who does what and to what extent” of the original. If you want a central midfielder who is the de facto main man of the team, in spite of not being the most eyecatching one at times – which Bozsik was – then you won't find a better fit than Xavi, that's obvious.

In the remake, there is a shift of balance with regard to this: Totti stands out in relation to Verratti (much) more than Hidegkuti did in relation to Bozsik. In that sense, Xavi (or Alonso, or Modric) would have been better fits, because they're heavier hitters than the still very young Verratti.

But I still like Verratti better than all those more accomplished players in the role he's supposed to play here: A wing half (a fairly offensive one as such, but nevertheless a player who must be defensively sound) working alongside another wing half (a more markedly defensive one).
 
Verratti is one of the best players on the pitch already, I don't understand the criticism.

Leaning towards @Gio but it's close, I may abstain from voting.
 
Raul is still in there? Why isn't he upgraded yet? I think there are couple of fat more influential players available to replace Raul and Klose. They were OK for earlier rounds, but in a final?
Go ahead and name the upgrades who tick both fit and quality boxes.
 
Henry for Puskas (drop to Inside Left) role.
Eto'o for Kocsis.
Raul fits because positionally he's almost an exact replica of Puskas. They're both left-footed, support-strikers, who can play up top, can drift wide, have exceptional finishing ability and are very creative. Henry isn't left footed and has no credibility as a support striker or no 10, great player though he was.

How many headers have you seen Eto'o score?
 
Verratti is one of the best players on the pitch already, I don't understand the criticism.

If you rate Verratti's career and accomplishments that highly then that's fine - we just rate the player differently.

Not sure what you don't understand about the criticism though as it's all well explained.