Sheep Draft S/F: Indnyc vs Enigma/TRV
- Thread starter Pat_Mustard
- Start date
That is a really excellent point. Certainly fancy Desailly more against Puskas and Kaiser in the midfield just lifts it up a notch if not two.
Personally I don't see how playing your best player out of his preferred position is a good decision here.
You're right but I expect Beckenbauer to have the freedom to contribute offensively and enter central midfield.
Souness-Desailly-Netzer+Beckenbauer in central midfield is redundant. I think I'd have preferred a central midfielder more playmaking than Souness.
On the other hand, Puskas in an uncomfortable position.
After all, the spirit of some games full of GOATS is sometimes to nitpick on some minor aspects
Anybody else thinks that Puskas would be very good in the CF position, playing the role like Aguero does? We never see him used in that position in drafts, but in our attempt to convert his position from the old formations to modern tactics, we could think about it again no?
Obviously second striker is a great choice for him, but why not CF as well if we convert Kocsis' position from Inside Forward to CF?
From what we know, Hidgekuti started as the nominal CF but dropped deep and both Kocsis and Puskas took up his position as the CF depending on the situation.
Puskas' historic track record as CF becomes even more evident when we look at his time at Real Madrid
Di Stefano was found all over the pitch and usually Puskas was the highest player on the pitch, waiting for the pass from behind or Gento running deep. Here we have Del Sol nominally as the other inside forward, but he was never the type to take over duties as a CF, he was much more likely to take part in the midfield battle from what I know.
Obviously second striker is a great choice for him, but why not CF as well if we convert Kocsis' position from Inside Forward to CF?
From what we know, Hidgekuti started as the nominal CF but dropped deep and both Kocsis and Puskas took up his position as the CF depending on the situation.
Puskas' historic track record as CF becomes even more evident when we look at his time at Real Madrid
Di Stefano was found all over the pitch and usually Puskas was the highest player on the pitch, waiting for the pass from behind or Gento running deep. Here we have Del Sol nominally as the other inside forward, but he was never the type to take over duties as a CF, he was much more likely to take part in the midfield battle from what I know.
He just does not have the workrate to do the job. There was an article I recall from Jonathan Wilson, who says even when fit Puskas never had the workrate...but even a half-fit Puskas was better than most out there...which I thought summed it up perfectly. You really need to tailor the team around him a lot to get his best. And that was my main problem with Enigma's team. Greaves was another player who was known for his genius and criticised constantly for his workrate. A Puskas-Greaves partnership will struggle to get the link up play going with midfield.
He needs hard working wingers to do the stretching and preferably a #10 behind him to feed the balls and then he'll pretty much be unstoppable.
Yeah. In the modern game I'd fancy him as a no 9 - plays to his strengths.
He would not be the first CF ever who lacks in workrate or not? I am not talking about this match specifically, but just in general the CF is more often than not the player who is the most isolated from midfield work and who does the least amount of defensive work. In a possession based system, he could easily be effective as a "fox in the box" when he gets low drilled crosses, through balls or is part of one-twos etc., as well as being a huge threat from the edge of the box with his long shots.
Maybe I understood you wrong and you actually approved of the idea of Puskas as #9 in principle with your last sentence, which means you want him in a 4231 and he would be great?
Point was he was not a No.9 whom you can plonk in any team and as a 9 in 4231 is probably the worst fit for him. Has to be a two/three striker formation.
That’s bollocks tbf.
Eusebio and Puskas in modern time will have no problem fitting in either 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3.
Just because they played in older system doesn’t mean they can’t play as a lone strikers on its own.
Same goes for Kalle for example.
I have no problem with Kalle or Eusebio.
How Puskas and Eusebio are any different for example?
I recall having the same argument with you on Eusebio being inside left.
I recall having the same argument with you on Eusebio being inside left.
Last edited: