Remake Draft Finals | Tuppet vs Gio

[BBRBB]

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.

This draft is a tactical challenge, so I don't see how career and accomplishments have anything to do with how a player can do a tactical job. There's already plenty enough material to judge Verratti's ability and playstyle, either he's a good fit or not.

The explanation I read is that people prefer 30yo or retired players just because they're more proven and won more things. That's just weird and completely off topic in this draft, makes absolutely no sense to me, especially when recreating a snapshot of a player.

 

[Theon]

This draft is a tactical challenge, so I don't see how career and accomplishments have anything to do with how a player can do a tactical job. There's already plenty enough material to judge Verratti's ability and playstyle, either he's a good fit or not.

The explanation I read is that people prefer 30yo or retired players just because they're more proven and won more things. That's just weird and completely off topic in this draft, makes absolutely no sense to me, especially when recreating a snapshot of a player.

Being a proven and successful player is obviously important when the task is to recreate one of the best and successful players of all time - that's surely obvious or how else are you going to evidence that he's up to the task.

It's clearly not just a stylistic challenge, you have to try and match the player for quality as well - I'm quite a nifty second striker but would be a poor choice for the Puskas role because I haven't got any of the talent.

Verratti is a decent tactical fit and an excellent young player but he doesn't have the quality of Bozsik and can't match his ability or influence on the pitch, whereas a number of other midfielders were closer in this respect.

The reason some people will prefer Xavi isn't just because of his age or trophy collection, it's because of the impact he had when he played and the fact that he consistently dominated football matches at the very highest level - which is exactly what Bozsik did and something Verratti is yet to do.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Surprised to see Raul getting mentioned . One of the very few absolute no brainers this entire draft , he's such a good remake or Puskas

Edit: for

 

[harms]

Henry for Puskas (drop to Inside Left) role.

It's actually debatable if Henry was more influential than Raul (although he probably was, but not by a fine margin). But as a Puskas replica? Fast, tall right-footed striker with a tendency to look for the ball on the left flank? I don't see any similarities. Raul is of the same build (but without the weight problem) and is a great fit stylistically. He is one of the best picks of the draft.

 

[Enigma_87]

Tuppet made nice changes to the team. Veron is better fit than Pirlo in that role(Iniesta even better but it was a great move from Gio to block him 3 times).

Both have done very well in reaching the final and with the final teams.

I expected more close final than a blowout like this.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it's a matter of Gio not having opted for anything I would consider even problematic.

Tuppet has done very well too, but there are more features you have to buy there, so to speak – the most obvious one being Marcelo, I suppose. I'm not calling it an undeniable flaw, mind you, but it's a reasoning behind it which you either buy or not – he only covers half of Facchetti, as it were, and personally I'd have gone for someone who covers more of the defensive side (at the expense of some of the offensive side).

The score isn't a reflection of how strong the teams are as remakes – it's the usual thing, I think: Just that more people have found Gio to have the slight edge.

The latter's team has been a bit of an odd one, in the sense that he made it very hard for himself to upgrade his key players in a manner that would make people go “ah, great upgrade” - but that's hardly something one can punish him for: He drafted just right from the start – and there you have it.

 

[Joga Bonito]

I think Verratti is a pretty astute fit for Bozsik myself. Bozsik was an excellent deep-ish playmaker but one who liked going forward on occasions and he did have quite a fair bit of 'spunk' to his game - one could say Verratti is even more aggressive with his of the ball endeavours. Bozsik was a well-rounded deep-ish CM whose primary job was dictating play but he could get about and get stuck in midfield. However, Theon does have a valid point in that perhaps someone such as Alonso (in his 08/09 CM-ish incarnation alongside a #6 in Mascherano) would be a 'closer' fit in terms of quality and he boasts the same mixture of class and grit on the ball, but in terms of tactical fit Verratti is bang on. That's not to underrate Verratti who has been pretty good in the CL for PSG and is an already an excellent midfielder as it stands.

Scoreline is overly harsh but Gio's crafted a cracking side as usual. He's like the SAF of these drafts . Can't believe he was allowed to draft both Totti and Raul, two fantastic individuals and fairly malleable all-round players who would have slotted in seamlessly in several sides. Esp, the former who should have been picked earlier imo. Funnily enough, my only (minor) gripe in his side was Robben for Czibor but that again is similar to the Verratti discussion, in that I don't quite think the Chelsea Robben is the peak version and he was a fairly injury plagued and inconsistent player. But once again, the left-wing Chelsea version Robben is a great tactical fit - which is the name of the game after all.

Great effort from Tuppet as well. Like that defense of his and Veron was a great choice in light of Gio blocking Iniesta. Not really a fan of that Marcelo move and actually thought Sorin was better for that role despite being the downgrade in quality. Other than that, he's done a commendable job remaking the ideology of the La Grande's Inter side.

 

[harms]

he only covers half of Facchetti, as it were, and personally I'd have gone for someone who covers more of the defensive side (at the expense of some of the offensive side).

For me Alaba is the best Facchetti impersonator from this pool. He plays differently, of course, but he is more than solid defensively (and, like Facchetti, even played centrally), plus he participates in attacks and not only as an overlapping fullback - you can notice that Facchetti is more often regarded as a forward and not as a winger, he loved to cut inside.

 

[Ecstatic]

“Cucu” Jozsef Bozsik is regarded as the greatest deep-lying playmaker in history of European football and was the best midfielder in the World during the mid-50s, was one of World-Class players but was overshadowed by the gifted attackers “The Magic Magyars” The Hungary Golden team. He was known for his flawless technique, flair, tactical nous, passing accuracy in both short and long range with the right moment, reliable ball possession with very difficult to lose the ball and control the game with ease, although he suffered from a lack of pace. He was an extremely intelligent player and was often used as a deep lying playmaker where his tackling ability was also helpful. He holds the record most Caps and most consecutive years of Caps for Hungary national team.Throughout his career, Bozsik won many honours. Bozsik was voted 6th European footballer of the year in the first year of this award. Besides, He was voted the third place Hungary’s player of century by IFFHS’s poll.

If I read this, I'm inclined to think Verratti is an excellent choice: 23 years old but already more than 170 games with PSG, 15 caps with Italy... despite the fact he was injured almost all the season (only 18 games with PSG this season against 53 the previous season). He was expected to take the lead of Italy and be their playmaker at the Euro.



Bozsik was probably more offensive and agressive so I can understand why @Theon would prefer Xavi or De Rossi. Xavi - himself - is a big fan of Verratti

I really like Verratti. I like watching him play. I like his vision of the game, his passing game. He almost never loses the ball.

"He's a player of exceptional ability. He would adapt perfectly if he was playing at Barcelona."

The former Pescara player has also been linked with Barca's rivals Real Madrid but Xavi is hopeful that he will one day end up at his former club.

"I'd like that," Xavi said. "He would be a great player for Barca. He's playing at PSG, one of the best teams in Europe, where they play some incredible football. He's one of the best midfielders in the world."

For me Alaba is the best Facchetti impersonator from this pool. He plays differently, of course, but he is more than solid defensively (and, like Facchetti, even played centrally), plus he participates in attacks and not only as an overlapping fullback - you can notice that Facchetti is more often regarded as a forward and not as a winger, he loved to cut inside.

I agree.

I expected more close final than a blowout like this.

I'm not surprised. The Catenaccio provides specific tactical constraints while the Hungary Golden team allows a very offensive team & more flexibility in the choices of the players.

 

[Tuppet]

Congratulations @Gio , I am not surprised at results either, Gio has drafted a ridiculously good team and a one sided affair was always on the card.

On Facchetti though - I disagree with Alaba being a better choice. I think its really downplaying how important Facchetti's attacking to the team was for Herrera. So much that instead of buying a left back he actually converted a forward to play left back. The fact that he was good at defending (although it's getting overblown) was almost a bonus for Inter, as he already had 3 fine defenders (almost 4 the way Bedin played) behind him to actually worry that much about defending.
Check out this this CL semifinal vs Liverpool, where all 3 Liverpool goals came from his side -


It was fitting that he was the one to score the beautiful winning goal in the replay of the game.


Again I am agreeing that he was a good defender, but taken from the context of that time, when defenders hardly used to go to attack, Facchetti was actually far more attacking than even Carlos or Marcelo in their time. His goalscoring record is also stupendous with nearly 60 goals. I would have loved to have a defender as complete as Facchetti in my team but if I have to chose I would without a doubt give attacking contribution a far more weightage for any Catenaccio team. His attacking was just way too important for them. I have said it before and I still think Bale is the best possible remake of Facchetti, just that it wouldn't probably fly in the draft.

All this does not distract from the fact that Marcelo / Facchetti is the worst remake on the park in this game, so I am not trying to change your mind just trying to portray Facchetti as accurately as I know.

On Verratti / Bozsik issue as I have mentioned before its definitely a nit pick. But for me the idea is to maintain the balance between the quality as well as attributes when remaking a player. If you go low enough on the quality ladder you can always find a player similar to the other player, but I would prefer a player who matches the quality as well. Its like Herrera might make a good Luisto Suarez, with similar-ish attributes, but he is not similar in the quality. As hot a player as Verratti is right now, I don't think he has achieved anywhere near to some of the other deep lying playmakers that were available, e.g. Xavi, Alonso etc. And IMO when remaking arguably the greatest deep lying midfielder in history, that should be taken into account. Even in playing style I don't think Verratti runs the team and be the heartbeat the way a Xavi could. Anyway as I mentioned its a small nit pick in a near flawless team.

Thanks for a great draft as well @Joga Bonito

 

[Chesterlestreet]

And IMO when remaking arguably the greatest deep lying midfielder in history, that should be taken into account.

He wasn't purely a deep lying midfielder, though - which makes it less clear cut what to go for. But the point several have made now, about Verratti simply being a bit too lightweight in terms of accomplishments and general heaviness, is fair enough: There's something slightly off there - not least (in my opinion) because Bozsik was every bit as heavy as Hidegkuti and even Puskas, whereas Verratti comes across as a rookie compared to the likes of Totti and Raul.

As for Facchetti, I get what you're saying, and I don't disagree very much with your interpretation of his role, but the fact is that it - the role - was played by someone who was defensively very sound for a player who ventured forward to that extent (and who suited the generally cagey nature of the system, not least: his forward surges were part of the system, they weren't wild runs). I don't see Marcelo as being able to function at all as a piece of that machinery - he'd be well protected, you could say, and as such it's very possible that he wouldn't end up as some sort of liability, but it wouldn't be the same system. The tactical cleverness and measured approach was something which characterized the whole team - to me, at least, Marcelo looks out of place with that in mind.

But Facchetti was impossible from the beginning - he was in the Charlton bracket. Something had to be sacrificed, and I think your argument has plenty of merit (it's an important observation - that his attacking game was so central to Herrera) and an interesting attempt at dealing with an essentially impossible task.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Congrats @Gio . Tough luck @Tuppet

 

[mazhar13]

@Joga Bonito

I really enjoyed this draft for the brief time I was involved in it. I feel a regret about not being that involved in this draft (didn't get involved in any other matches other than the final and my/P-Nut's match). Congrats on making such a great draft.

And congrats to @Gio and @Tuppet for getting to the final and making such great sides. Gio fielded an awesome team here and is definitely a worthy winner of this draft.

 

[harms]

On Facchetti though - I disagree with Alaba being a better choice. I think its really downplaying how important Facchetti's attacking to the team was for Herrera. So much that instead of buying a left back he actually converted a forward to play left back.

I think our disagreement is not about Facchetti role, but more about our perception of Alaba, his quality and his playing style.
Facchetti was a very all-rounded footballer and Marcelo, as good as he is in his attacking almost wing back role, is actually very one-dimensional. He is your archetypical overlapping fullback with an ultra-attacking approach. But I think that Alaba contributes almost as much to the build-up and the attacks and, at the same time, he is less predictable and his impressive tactical baggage allows him to even play as a center-forward at times (he played as a false 9 on this Euros for example)

Plus they both had/has amazing understanding of the game, something that is clearly one of the main Marcelo's weaknesses

 

[Gio]

Well played @Tuppet. Strong team as usual, I couldn't fault much there really. Facchetti was a tough gig and the Sorin pick in the first round of drafting was inspired I thought.

Well done to the draft committee for a mostly seamless affair which is an achievement for an innovative concept like this one.

Quite chuffed to have been drawn with the Magyars, perhaps the greatest side never to have won the World Cup.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Sorry for the late bump, but came across a nice article on the Hungary vs England match.

It's in German, so you have to right click and translate the page.

http://spielverlagerung.de/2012/10/16/retroanalyse-england-vs-ungarn-36-22-11-1953/

Couple of interesting points


The Role of Budai

Umschaltläufe the winger

Generally knew to like the movements of the winger. Good in a direct duel, intelligent browsing gifts and a strong defensive work the cornerstone of the game, especially right outside Budai were knew thanks to the many Zuspiele to convince him.

However, he did something even that he was so conspicuous. By the ball picked up at the back, or even self-conquered, he provided another player in defensive composite, thus not only provided offensive but also defensive about numbers.

He picked up speed through the space in the second period on the wings and had time to look for a face-off station or which generate the attack course. Exactly these runs back and forth were that aspect, five years later, Mario Zagallo practiced for the Selecao.

This vertical play attracted the Brazilians by even more extreme by Zagallo was even deeper in a 4-2-4 system. "El lobo" interpreted his role so a trace more defensive and running intensive, seen thus formative part was a 4-3-3.

Later Lobanovskiy and other coaches pulled in Western Europe of the 70s the second wing a plane back which made for defensive strength, more compactness and 4-4-2.

Nevertheless, the offensive suffered only limited under this deeper alignment of their winger: after all, is to run forward more quickly and easily than backwards. When the Hungarians in the 50s we saw this, of course, in a different way than in the '70s and the' 90s then, but the situational After-back works the winger was outstanding in the context of that time.

Thus it can be said that not only the asymmetric 3-2-5 was the model for the 4-2-4, anticipated the zone defense and the ball game was practiced in its infancy, the winger the Magyars were even the mastermind of their offspring in 4- 4-2 systems and also the modern "defensive winger" .

....

On the left Robb was logged off, who had no real good action and would have no less than can be confused with a lost audience. By this he was not alone to blame, because he simply hardly got balls because Budais defensive work and the team result focus on Matthews, while the tactical corset Englishman anyway constricting the entire collective.




Plans to deal with Hidegkuti

Interestingly enough it seems that the English did have a plan to deal with Hidegkuti and weren't completely taken aback by his quality or style of play as it's made out.



The problem was not the obvious, i.e. the tracking of the opponent and the resulting opening of space, but something else entirely. Jimmy Johnston basically held his position and didn’t track Nandor Hidegkuti at all.

The opponents were ultimately got more right, which probably had to do with the fact that Winterbottom and Johnston had discussed how to deal with Hidegkuti before the game – with the following effect: they decided that Johnston should not track him, as Sweden had done successfully, but that they should use someone from the midfield, probably the left halfback in the 3-2-2-3. – RM

The English were neither surprised nor clueless – they were simply powerless. Hidegkuti had no trackers and set up overloads and combinations; England was shot down. On May 23, 1954, there was a return match, and in an effort to avoid making the same “mistake” the center-half tracked Hidegkuti. The result speaks for itself: England suffered an even bigger 1:7 defeat.



Bozsik

http://spielverlagerung.de/2015/12/03/tuerchen-3-jozsef-bozsik/

A nice article on Bozsik with his role in the WC 1954 final being highlighted in particular (he only misplaced a single, albeit a significant, pass in the entire final)

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Should've soaked the pitch at Wembley, as Cullis did at Molineux the year after.

However, it wasn't pure gamesmanship which made Wolves successful against Honved: You could probably make a case for them actually using what English football was - still - very good at: Speed and physicality. They used these traits more effectively (and more cynically) than England did - who were caught sleeping at the wheel in more ways than one, running around putting out the wrong fires, as one commentator famously put it.

The bizarre Hidegkuti situation says it all, really. They should have treated the match as what it was: An underdog (but an underdog with many brilliant players - just look at the lineup) against the best team in the world - that's precisely what Cullis did, and with a little help from a soggy pitch, he succeeded in outfighting them.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Should've soaked the pitch at Wembley, as Cullis did at Molineux the year after.

However, it wasn't pure gamesmanship which made Wolves successful against Honved: You could probably make a case for them actually using what English football was - still - very good at: Speed and physicality. They used these traits effectively (and more cynically) than England did - who were caught sleeping at the wheel in more ways than one, running around putting out the wrong fires, as one commentator famously put it.

The bizarre Hidegkuti situation says it all, really. They should have treated the match as what it was: An underdog (but an underdog with many brilliant players - just look at the lineup) against the best team in the world - that's precisely what Cullis did, and with a little help from a soggy pitch, he succeeded in outfighting them.

Indeed, they did have the likes of Matthews, Sewell, Wright, Mortenson, Ramsey; in addition to Finney and Byrne in the other fixture. Their hubris and 'invincible mentality' played a significant role in their downfall.