The Reality Draft: Main Thread (Finals)

Bossis-Amoros
Bossis-Littbarski
Rossi-Scirea-Gentile-(Tardelli)

7 players were playing in the same team as someone else.
 
I'll go for one of the longer names of the draft...

José Miguel González Martín del Campo

24723757.jpg


Or Michel for short.

Linking up with his teammates from the successful Madrid years, Sanchez and Schuster.
 
Skizzo said:
:lol: bit surprised myself....was hoping he'd fly under the radar. Considering schuster and sanchez were both drafted for me...figured I should give them some company that I drafted myself.
Click to expand...

Great pick individually, but really brilliant considering who you are partnering him up with.
 
01. Annahnomoss - (3. Tardelli) 1. Cocu 2. Gentile 4. Amoros 5. Rossi 6. Gascoigne 7. Scirea 8. Bossis 9. Littbarski 10. Sterling 11. D. Alves
02. Chesterlestreet - (7. Lahm) 1. Mascherano 2. Nedved 3. Neeskens 4. Beckham 5. Henry 6. Júnior, 8. Buchwald 9. G. Neville 10. J. Rodriguez 11. Augenthaler
03. Joga Bonito - (4. O Ardiles) 1. Keown 2. Baggio 3. Figo 5. Weah 6. Søren Lerby 7. Cafú 8. Koeman 9. De Rossi 10. Juan Bernat 11. Sanchís
04. Raees - (2. Makelele) 1. Morena 3. Socrates 4. Conti 5. Stoichkov 6. Ballack 7. Zanetti, 8. Costacurta 9. Terry, 10. Pogba, 11. D. Villa
05. antohan - (3. Gerrard) 1. Ljungberg 2. Boniek 4. Effenberg 5. Raul 6. Luis Enrique 7. Hierro 8. T. Silva 9. Ferrara 10. Götze 11. Vieri
06. BorisDeLeFora - (7. Bergomi) 1. Zambrotta 2. Tigana 3. Robson 4. Cerezo 5. Del Piero 6. Klinsmann 8. Lucio 9. Popescu 10. Koke 11. A. Cole
07. ctp - (6. Ribéry) 1. Brolin 2. Lato 3. Xavi 4. Guardiola 5. Shevchenko 7. Kohler 8. Carvalho 9. Kakà 10. Carvajal 11. Evra
08. Skizzo - (7. Brehme) 1. Solskjaer 2. Cabrini 3. Schuster 4. K. Förster 5. Hugo Sanchez 6. Barnes 8. Deschamps 9. McGrain 10. Marquinhos 11. Michel
09. MJJ (Theon) - (4. Dalglish) 1. Di Livio 2. Souness 3. Bochini 5. Rivaldo 6. McGrath 7. Sammer 8. Campbell 9. Totti 10. Ricardo Rodriguez
10. Jayvin - (3. Iniesta) 1. Gallas 2. Vieira 4. Lizarazu 5. Romario 6. Overmars 7. Desailly 8. Blanc 9. Xabi Alonso 10. Hazard
11. Stobzilla - (8. Jugovic) 1. Camoranesi 2. Hansen 3. Davids 4. Balakov 5. Batistuta 6. Irwin 7. Passarella 9. Pires 10. Strootman
12. Aldo - (7. Rio) 1. Senna 2. Hagi 3. Pirlo 4. Schweinsteiger 5. RvN 6. Tresor 8. Camacho 9. Gerets 10. Neymar
13. The Red Viper - (5. Simonsen) 1. Prosinečki 2. Robben 3. Scholes 4. Vidic 6. Eto'o 7. Stam 8. Rui Costa 9. Dunga 10. Rafael Da Silva
14. VivaJanuzaj - (7. Nesta) 1. Francescoli 2. Seedorf 3. Breitner 4. Vierchowod 5. Rummenigge 6. Savicevic 8. Verón 9. Adams 10. Alaba
15. harms - (1. Puyol) 2. Blokhin 3. Falcao 4. Roberto Carlos 5. Bergkamp 6.Bonhof 7. Ruggeri 8. Willy Ortiz 9. Stielike 10. Varane
16. crappycraperson - (7. Cannavaro) 1. Nadal 2. M. Kempes 3. Roy Keane 4. Jan Ceulemans 5. Shearer 6. Prohaska 8. Briegel 9. Ayala 10. Kroos
 
crappycraperson said:
It is obscene to argue that Gotze is more proven than Kroos or Neymar. At a stretch I would say Varane is also more proven than him.

Gotze has not had the performances you talk about for more than a year now. Even if his last year at Dortmund, he took a back seat to Lendowski and Rues.
Click to expand...

I said he's in a select group. Neymar and Varane and Kroos probably also fall into that group.

However, with Neymar there is an inherent hate of him on this forum on some level - and he's always had this "but hasn't quite hit it off completely in Europe yet" bias.
Varane is similar to Goetze in tems of experience, however with defenders again there is an inherent bias against them when they are so young.
Kroos is probably right but Goetze for me has done that bit more.
 
I think it is fair to say Götze promised more but Kroos has consolidated his promise more, which isn't surprising when Götze has had to face the transition from being the star of a team that revolved around him (which is not to say Dortmund were too reliant on him) to being the new arrival at an all-conquering team riddled with established stars but in flux, with a manager tinkering with new ideas. I wouldn't be surprised if Kroos has a poorer season for Madrid than he did last year, it happens, and likewise I wouldn't be surprised if Götze starts finding his old form and trajectory (not that he has been playing badly anyway).
 
There is no pre-decided manner to judge the youth players except "in their peak" and what that means is up for every voter and manager to decide. Some people will consider Gotze's stint at Dortmund as what we should refer to as his peak, in which case I think he's up there with the most proven and one of the best of the drafted youth players. Others will say that we should judge them for their current level, in which case he's slightly lower etc.

There is no right and wrong as we never decide to actually define the inconclusive term "peak". Kroos and Hazard are clearly stand outs as they are great in no matter which manner you want to define peak. The rest will just go down to every person and their idea of what "peak" means in these drafts.

I went with Sterling as I think that for a youth player "peak" is reasonably something shorter than it is for someone who has already finished their career. It seemed to be the case for more people as well as Gotze slipped through so long.
 
Surprised no one picked verratti, along with pogba and gundogan the three best young centre midfielders and the natural successor to pirlo.
 
crappycraperson said:
It is obscene to argue that Gotze is more proven than Kroos or Neymar. At a stretch I would say Varane is also more proven than him.

Gotze has not had the performances you talk about for more than a year now. Even if his last year at Dortmund, he took a back seat to Lendowski and Rues.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's true at all unless you only go by CL performances in the knockout rounds when Dortmund attacked more on the counter. Reus' first season at Dortmund wasn't that successful, definitely not in domestic competitions. He clearly struggled to adapt. I'm not the biggest fan of rankings, but to back it up a bit, kicker magazine has Götze only behind Ribery as the 2nd best player in the Bundesliga season in 12/13 with a significant gap to Lewandowski and an even bigger one to Reus. Götze was unlucky to miss the last few games through his injury but up to that point he was overall Dortmund's best player along with Gündogan.
 
Peak sure must mean peak performance level?

Leaving aside those picked, how do you assess someone like Josema Giménez? Behind Godín and Miranda in the pecking orden, poor kid doesn't get a look-in and has only played two games for them in over a year since joining them the previous Summer.

In the meantime, he was phenomenal at the U-20WC where Uruguay were runners-up thanks to a large extent to him being a defensive brickwall. Best defender in the tourno by a long country mile. He had his first cap having to stop James Rodríguez and Falcao in a make or break WCQ while paired up with a 35-year-old Andrés Scotti: clean sheet. Has since racked up 11 starts, missing the debacle against Costa Rica due to Tabárez prioritising the experience of Diego Lugano. Starts against England and looks at ease switching from CB in a four to RCB in a 5, to RB (can't remember if 4 or 5). Starts against Italy, same shit and a clean sheet. That after playing two games in the entire season for his club.

So what's his peak? Being able to hold his own against the likes of Falcao, Rooney, Balotelli, or collecting splinters? I know what my answer is.
 
MJJ said:
Surprised no one picked verratti, along with pogba and gundogan the three best young centre midfielders and the natural successor to pirlo.
Click to expand...

I had him down as my first choice likely pick for that round until I got Raúl. Can't/won't play Raúl upfront on his own unless it's a 100% counter-attacking side. Need more presence upfront to play a 4-3-3 with a defensive pivot. If I don't buy it, why would I expect anyone else to?
 
Balu said:
I don't think that's true at all unless you only go by CL performances in the knockout rounds when Dortmund attacked more on the counter. Reus' first season at Dortmund wasn't that successful, definitely not in domestic competitions. He clearly struggled to adapt. I'm not the biggest fan of rankings, but to back it up a bit, kicker magazine has Götze only behind Ribery as the 2nd best player in the Bundesliga season in 12/13 with a significant gap to Lewandowski and an even bigger one to Reus. Götze was unlucky to miss the last few games through his injury but up to that point he was overall Dortmund's best player along with Gündogan.
Click to expand...

Ok. I stand corrected then (I did mostly watch Dortmund from Jan onwards that season)

Anyway my original Goetze point was wth regards to how difficult it may be to sell him to voters (especially scan ones). I still stand by that.

I do still think that he is a top talent but IMO there is no question that one should be worried about his development at Bayern or that he would most definitely have been better off staying at Dortmund and moving after 24 or something.
 
For the record, that was the one where I either had to drop Boniek or do something completely mental like:

---------------------Vieri
Raúl-------------------------------Ljungberg
------------Boniek-------Effenberg
-------------------Verratti
LB/Lucho----Silva-----Hierro-----Ferrara

And that's where the circuit started with Verratti very competently pivoting and fulfilling Blind's duties, Lucho covering Boniek, Boniek roaming the left flank ala Di María, Raúl going to second striker and Silva-Hierro-Ferrara forming a back three.

It actually wasn't too bad but amid all the explanations of this genius movement going on one thing keeps staring right back at you: "why don't you just drop Freddie?" :lol:
 
Last edited:
crappycraperson said:
Anyway my original Goetze point was wth regards to how difficult it may be to sell him to voters (especially scan ones). I still stand by that.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, the communication strategy to brainfarting scan voters has already been agreed:

onefingermsg.gif
 
Aldo said:
Manager votes count for 2 in this one, scan voters can go feck themselves.
Click to expand...
hhahaha.. worth keeping in mind that many managers chicken out of voting all together and that may be even more true with pressure of swinging it big with 2 votes.
 
Exactly, they get ONE vote

middlefinger.jpg


Will be interesting when tracking the scoreline and explaining to people their votes are "less important". Clique shits that we are :lol:
 
antohan said:
Peak sure must mean peak performance level?
Click to expand...

It sure does. But how long does a "level" have to been maintained to be regarded as a peak, in comparison to good form. There is no decided time span, so every voter and manager has his own ideas of what a peak is. Which is why some may pick Adriano/Nani/Valencia and another may consider their 18 ish months too little for a peak.

The drafts would make a lot more sense and be more positive if we actually defined what a peak was. It often turns in to an argument where you can't be wrong or right because the definition of peak is in the eyes of the beholder.
 
Annahnomoss said:
It sure does. But how long does a "level" have to been maintained to be regarded as a peak, in comparison to good form. There is no decided time span, so every voter and manager has his own ideas of what a peak is. Which is why some may pick Adriano/Nani/Valencia and another may consider their 18 ish months too little for a peak.

The drafts would make a lot more sense and be more positive if we actually defined what a peak was. It often turns in to an argument where you can't be wrong or right because the definition of peak is in the eyes of the beholder.
Click to expand...
There is no point in defining it since people will always vote with their own theory on it
 
Aldo said:
Manager votes count for 2 in this one, scan voters can go feck themselves.
Click to expand...
Do I count as a scan voter in this rule? I'm not sure I can stand the fact that antohan's opinion is worth twice as much as mine, that guy knows feck all about football.
 
Annahnomoss said:
It sure does. But how long does a "level" have to been maintained to be regarded as a peak, in comparison to good form. There is no decided time span, so every voter and manager has his own ideas of what a peak is. Which is why some may pick Adriano/Nani/Valencia and another may consider their 18 ish months too little for a peak.

The drafts would make a lot more sense and be more positive if we actually defined what a peak was. It often turns in to an argument where you can't be wrong or right because the definition of peak is in the eyes of the beholder.
Click to expand...

Knock yourself out. It doesn't matter since you will never have all voters informed of your definition or in agreement with it. For retired/almost thirty players I take a three year timespan, for young ones I take their best season as an indicator of what their peak performance would be like by the time they retire (i.e. I don't project potential, just give them the advantage of a narrower timeframe).
 
01. Annahnomoss - (3. Tardelli) 1. Cocu 2. Gentile 4. Amoros 5. Rossi 6. Gascoigne 7. Scirea 8. Bossis 9. Littbarski 10. Sterling 11. D. Alves
02. Chesterlestreet - (7. Lahm) 1. Mascherano 2. Nedved 3. Neeskens 4. Beckham 5. Henry 6. Júnior, 8. Buchwald 9. G. Neville 10. J. Rodriguez 11. Augenthaler
03. Joga Bonito - (4. O Ardiles) 1. Keown 2. Baggio 3. Figo 5. Weah 6. Søren Lerby 7. Cafú 8. Koeman 9. De Rossi 10. Juan Bernat 11. Sanchís
04. Raees - (2. Makelele) 1. Morena 3. Socrates 4. Conti 5. Stoichkov 6. Ballack 7. Zanetti, 8. Costacurta 9. Terry, 10. Pogba, 11. D. Villa
05. antohan - (3. Gerrard) 1. Ljungberg 2. Boniek 4. Effenberg 5. Raul 6. Luis Enrique 7. Hierro 8. T. Silva 9. Ferrara 10. Götze 11. Vieri
06. BorisDeLeFora - (7. Bergomi) 1. Zambrotta 2. Tigana 3. Robson 4. Cerezo 5. Del Piero 6. Klinsmann 8. Lucio 9. Popescu 10. Koke 11. A. Cole
07. ctp - (6. Ribéry) 1. Brolin 2. Lato 3. Xavi 4. Guardiola 5. Shevchenko 7. Kohler 8. Carvalho 9. Kakà 10. Carvajal 11. Evra
08. Skizzo - (7. Brehme) 1. Solskjaer 2. Cabrini 3. Schuster 4. K. Förster 5. Hugo Sanchez 6. Barnes 8. Deschamps 9. McGrain 10. Marquinhos 11. Michel
09. MJJ (Theon) - (4. Dalglish) 1. Di Livio 2. Souness 3. Bochini 5. Rivaldo 6. McGrath 7. Sammer 8. Campbell 9. Totti 10. Ricardo Rodriguez
10. Jayvin - (3. Iniesta) 1. Gallas 2. Vieira 4. Lizarazu 5. Romario 6. Overmars 7. Desailly 8. Blanc 9. Xabi Alonso 10. Hazard
11. Stobzilla - (8. Jugovic) 1. Camoranesi 2. Hansen 3. Davids 4. Balakov 5. Batistuta 6. Irwin 7. Passarella 9. Pires 10. Strootman
12. Aldo - (7. Rio) 1. Senna 2. Hagi 3. Pirlo 4. Schweinsteiger 5. RvN 6. Tresor 8. Camacho 9. Gerets 10. Neymar
13. The Red Viper - (5. Simonsen) 1. Prosinečki 2. Robben 3. Scholes 4. Vidic 6. Eto'o 7. Stam 8. Rui Costa 9. Dunga 10. Rafael Da Silva
14. VivaJanuzaj - (7. Nesta) 1. Francescoli 2. Seedorf 3. Breitner 4. Vierchowod 5. Rummenigge 6. Savicevic 8. Verón 9. Adams 10. Alaba
15. harms - (1. Puyol) 2. Blokhin 3. Falcao 4. Roberto Carlos 5. Bergkamp 6.Bonhof 7. Ruggeri 8. Willy Ortiz 9. Stielike 10. Varane
16. crappycraperson - (7. Cannavaro) 1. Nadal 2. M. Kempes 3. Roy Keane 4. Jan Ceulemans 5. Shearer 6. Prohaska 8. Briegel 9. Ayala 10. Kroos

@MJJ @Theon
 
antohan said:
Knock yourself out. It doesn't matter since you will never have all voters informed of your definition or in agreement with it. For retired/almost thirty players I take a three year timespan, for young ones I take their best season as an indicator of what their peak performance would be like by the time they retire (i.e. I don't project potential, just give them the advantage of a narrower timeframe).
Click to expand...

I am sure it would be more positive to define it than not to define it. We usually don't change the drafts towards what the scan voters cares about. I am sure the majority would get used to the fact that the peak was judged on X months/years after a while as well.

The same way that players seems to be much more well received the fourth time they are picked over the first.
 
Annahnomoss said:
I am sure it would be more positive to define it than not to define it. We usually don't change the drafts towards what the scan voters cares about. I am sure the majority would get used to the fact that the peak was judged on X months/years after a while as well.

The same way that players seems to be much more well received the fourth time they are picked over the first.
Click to expand...

I think it'll be very difficult to define peak as the position/strategy they use can vary, the early Scholes bombing into the box or the later years midfield mastero? Manangers in their write up can indicate the season for players which they consider them at best and that should suffice at best.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
I think it'll be very difficult to define peak as the position/strategy they use can vary, the early Scholes bombing into the box or the later years midfield mastero? Manangers in their write up can indicate the season for players which they consider them at best and that should suffice at best.
Click to expand...

It works great with players with long peaks like Giggs/Scholes/Seedorf, but players who had shorter peaks 12-24 months are more problematic. Some voters will judged them for the level they had then, others will completely disregard them as they only count 3 years as a peak etc.

There is no real benefit, whatsoever, to not define it. All it causes are childish arguments and discussions about what their individual opinion about how long a peak is. The discussion would be much better spent the way Pippa spent his Adriano discussion of actually providing proofs of a a peak in accordance to to the defined rules.

If we know that X amount is what a peak actually means, then we can pick the players that fits in those requirements.
 
antohan said:
Knock yourself out. It doesn't matter since you will never have all voters informed of your definition or in agreement with it. For retired/almost thirty players I take a three year timespan, for young ones I take their best season as an indicator of what their peak performance would be like by the time they retire (i.e. I don't project potential, just give them the advantage of a narrower timeframe).
Click to expand...
We have this debate every draft. I'm pretty sure the only one it was defined was the Prem draft where it was over a minimum 100-game period, which again fits with the standard three-year timespan. Three years seems fine to me, few players ever have a genuine peak longer than that, while it gets rid of the purple-patchers.
 
Balu said:
Only one reinforcement round sucks in my opinion. It's such a big advantage for the managers who pick first.
Click to expand...
Aye. Be as well going back to the old reinforcement system of picking the fruits from your vanquished opponent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.