It's mainly wide attackers who bang the goals in these days. Strikers are now expected to focus on linking the play.
Where have the strikers gone?
- Thread starter eire-red
- Start date
Why would you blame Mourinho for the death of the number 10? He’s always had classic number 10’s in his teams.
His Porto team had Deco.
His Chelsea team had Lampard (although more of a 8/10 hybrid I suppose).
And In Inter and Madrid he had Sneijder and Ozil who are classic number 10’s.
Its obviously Pep who is to blame, if anything.
Interestingly enough, during Sir Alex’s time all his best number 10’s were second forwards (Cantona, Sheringham, Yorke and Rooney).
Even Scholes started his career as a forward.
Kagawa was the first pure number 10 I seen play for United during my time.
Because of tiki Taka football and emphasis on technique, all your clubs do not want a traditional target man or poacher anymore. So traditional No 9s are a dying breed
In your first list you have Essien born in 1982 with Effenberg born 1968, gap of 14 years, Effenberg retired by the time Essien got good, by the same logic then KDB born in 1991 is a contemporary of Lampard as he's born 13 years later etc, always happens in discussions like these if you conflate the eras, if you're talking about 2024 then Kroos is playing as well as ever and should be a part of the later group as much as the previous one.
Anyway Valverde is an exceptional midfielder imo, who is as good as many of those listed. Odegaard is as good a creative midfielder as we've seen in PL for many years. Bernardo Silva plays off the wing but he will go down as a great player, as will Gundogan. Kante is only 32 and still playing in the Euros, seems wrong to put him in the same category as Xavi when Xavi was in Qatar when Kanté started getting good. You could argue Barella as good as the likes of Senna, Rui Costa, Mendieta. Camavinga will be one of the best in the world soon, if he isn't already.
Pep however has Haaland as No 9 for 2 seasons already.
They just changed to different positions. Most wide forwards we see today would have been secondary strike partners or in some cases even the primary strike partners if they played 20 years ago. Any wide player who isn't characterized as a mazy dribbler or amazing crosser would have been in one of the front 2 positions.
Mbappe, Vinicius, Rodrygo, Salah, Rashford, Mane, , Saka, Son etc. They would all have played in the front 2, either as the main striker or the support striker.
In the same token, Henry, Del Piero and David Villa would have played as wide forwards in todays game.
Not really. England were playing Anderton on the flanks. England has had considerable depth at full back/wing back, where some of these players (Trent, Reece James and Trippier) may have been considered wide midfielders in the past. England also had Foden, Maddison, Eze in no.10 roles, who potentially could all have either played out wide or as a secondary forward in a 442. Training in a way suited for 2 strikers or deeper wingers would have changed the profile of how they play and potentially their skillset.
Folk are saying the absence of halland is a blow to the overall quality of strikers involved in this tournament is a sad indictment of the current state of the position in itself as while i find the assertion itself to be wholly unproblematic the fact that the Norwegian may be considered the best striker in world at the moment (and not without reason) is a sad development from the hey days of 90s and beyond where not only the world was much more filled to the brim with quality number 9s but players who actually seemed more complete in their overall mastery of the game, in their positioning, hold up play and other aspects of the game.
Take the 90s for example a decade which in its length such players such as van Basten, luis Ronaldo and batistuta and many others who I haven't named, each much more capable than what we have as of now, much more dynamic and much more game changing.
Take the 90s for example a decade which in its length such players such as van Basten, luis Ronaldo and batistuta and many others who I haven't named, each much more capable than what we have as of now, much more dynamic and much more game changing.
The Tiki-taka Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
I'm not really sure what point you're disagreeing with. I was just pointing out that the sheer number of quality strikers in England alone, let alone abroad Europe, was higher much higher in the 90s than it is now.
Formations and styles of play obviously impact that. That's not something I was disputing. And suggesting that Maddison or Foden could potentially have become quality strikers if they were trained in a way suited to 442 is poorly hypothetical and not really relevant. It doesn't change the fact that they're not.
People keep mentioning Guardiola but Guardiola's teams almost always had an elite classic #9 in there, including right now when he's had Haaland as a starter for 2 years and doesn't look like he wants to ship him elsewhere.
So clearly there is a demand for strikers even in the Guardiola era.
I think that modern generations of players simply don't have that ruthless individualistic and egoistic mentality you need to be a striker, they prefer to be more of team players and this type of mentality is encouraged in youth set ups.
Back in the previous generations it was more about street football and making a name for yourself individually. It's not just a tactical but also a cultural and social change in football. The same reason why you don't see that many dribblers and free kick specialists either.
The problem with lack of quality strikers was already apparent before Guardiola had any impact on football. Guardiola became manager of Barcelona in 2008 and at the time the generation of strikers coming through youth ranks was already horrible compared to previous generations. Even if Guardiola never went into coaching the problem would be the same, as the generation of players born between 1989 and 1995 failed to produce a single great striker except Harry Kane.
In late 00s all big national teams except Argentina already had a massive problem with lack of good young strikers. Italy kept playing Toni and relied on Cassano (Balotelli turned out to be a dud), Portugal relied on Postiga and Germany had to rely on old Klose. Spain only had Torres and Villa and there was a huge drop off after that, which is why Torres kept playing on tournaments even after his decline. France had Benzema and Holland had Van Persie and Huntelaar, but they didn't have much depth in that position either. And who did England have in late 00s beside Rooney? Heskey had to start games on WC 2010. So this trend was clearly already there before Guardiola.
So clearly there is a demand for strikers even in the Guardiola era.
I think that modern generations of players simply don't have that ruthless individualistic and egoistic mentality you need to be a striker, they prefer to be more of team players and this type of mentality is encouraged in youth set ups.
Back in the previous generations it was more about street football and making a name for yourself individually. It's not just a tactical but also a cultural and social change in football. The same reason why you don't see that many dribblers and free kick specialists either.
The problem with lack of quality strikers was already apparent before Guardiola had any impact on football. Guardiola became manager of Barcelona in 2008 and at the time the generation of strikers coming through youth ranks was already horrible compared to previous generations. Even if Guardiola never went into coaching the problem would be the same, as the generation of players born between 1989 and 1995 failed to produce a single great striker except Harry Kane.
In late 00s all big national teams except Argentina already had a massive problem with lack of good young strikers. Italy kept playing Toni and relied on Cassano (Balotelli turned out to be a dud), Portugal relied on Postiga and Germany had to rely on old Klose. Spain only had Torres and Villa and there was a huge drop off after that, which is why Torres kept playing on tournaments even after his decline. France had Benzema and Holland had Van Persie and Huntelaar, but they didn't have much depth in that position either. And who did England have in late 00s beside Rooney? Heskey had to start games on WC 2010. So this trend was clearly already there before Guardiola.
Last edited:
Milan Baros
Ivica Olic
Lukas Podolski
Jan Huntelaar
Dirk Kuyt
Henri Larsson
Alexander Frei
All better strikers than Haaland?
This disrespect on Niklas Füllkrug ...
Pep had Lewandowski as striker in Bayern as well.
In the first group obviously!Milan Baros
Ivica Olic
Lukas Podolski
Jan Huntelaar
Dirk Kuyt
Henri Larsson
Alexander Frei
All better strikers than Haaland?
I think Fowler had a pretty poor international record too, might be wrong but he used to get 25-30 goals a season for Liverpool and i don't recall him playing much for England.
This tournament has kind of emphasized the point about strikers. Germany, Italy, Netherlands, it's a bit grim.
Yup. And this is part of why he’ll never be the GOAT. His tactical approach to the game has ruined football.
If you have Lewandowski you play him but I distinctly remember him making a comment about his teams not needing a striker.
Not only strikers though I mean there has been a massive drop-off in the quality of the game across board. Nowadays we don't see a Scholesque/Pirloesque-type long-passing range anymore.. crossing nowadays is just pointless and does it feel like the players now seem to be gassed real quick and lack intensity compared to players in the 90's and early 00's?
I just imagine someone reintroducing me to football as a kid now without me seeing Ronaldinho or say seeing fat Ronaldo tearing defenders a new one as a kid watching it in my uncle's lounge back in the days I will be totally pissed and hate football now if it were to be the case.
I will still pay good money to see Neymar play or even Pogba play with the ball.
I just imagine someone reintroducing me to football as a kid now without me seeing Ronaldinho or say seeing fat Ronaldo tearing defenders a new one as a kid watching it in my uncle's lounge back in the days I will be totally pissed and hate football now if it were to be the case.
I will still pay good money to see Neymar play or even Pogba play with the ball.
Ronaldo and Messi are to blame not Pep. They wanted to be wing forwards with opportunity to score lots of goals playing with someone as mid forward who plays a supporting role.
I don't think it's one manager's style being so influential to "blame" for modern football style trends (Pep or whoever) but rather that a granular level of statistical analysis has become a much bigger part of the game than it was, and has really broadened the scope of what tacticians can achieve in finetuning a team. Pep being able to refine his style to the extent he has is just a part of that. in the 70s-90s, system managers that focused on team/pitch geometry and controlling space in a very coordinated way with pressing/smart positioning like Sacchi, Lippi Lobanovsky, early Van Gaal didn't have remotely the same level of resources and technological support to work with to take their ideas and squad-building to the same level of detail as the modern managers. Yet that same managerial intent to turn football into a science that could maximise the efficiency of the simple technical side of the game and minimise the need for unpredictable improvising flair/ moments of genius deciding games had been there for a long time.
Plus the globalised nature of the game now means everyone is more aware of the newest effective tactical developments in other countries than 90s and earlier.
Plus the globalised nature of the game now means everyone is more aware of the newest effective tactical developments in other countries than 90s and earlier.
Feel like pure shit. Just want 442 back.
The last decent generation of strikers came from players born between 1986-88: Aguero, Cavani, Suarez, Falcao, Higuain, Lewandowski, Džeko, Benzema...
The next generation, players born between 1989-1991, didn't produce any striker on that level. From then on you'd only get an odd elite striker here and there like Kane (born in 1993) and the likes of Osimhen (1998) and Haaland (2000), and the last two still don't deserve to be compared to the strikers I listed.
I don't see how you could blame Guardiola for this sudden drop in quality, since it all started with the 1989-1992 generation of players, guys who were coming through the youth ranks in the 00s when no one knew what tiki taka is.
The next generation, players born between 1989-1991, didn't produce any striker on that level. From then on you'd only get an odd elite striker here and there like Kane (born in 1993) and the likes of Osimhen (1998) and Haaland (2000), and the last two still don't deserve to be compared to the strikers I listed.
I don't see how you could blame Guardiola for this sudden drop in quality, since it all started with the 1989-1992 generation of players, guys who were coming through the youth ranks in the 00s when no one knew what tiki taka is.
The decline of strikers is also obvious when you consider that dribbling past the GK in a 1 on 1 situation is becoming a dying art.
R9 scores from this 100 out of 100 times, just dribbling past the GK.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GRbp0FWb0AAZipk?format=jpg
There's also numerous other strikers from the 90s and 00s who would dribble past the GK 100/100 times here. Situations like this were seen as the easiest you could have as a striker.
Now strikers simply don't have any confidence in their dribbling and go for long shots.
R9 scores from this 100 out of 100 times, just dribbling past the GK.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GRbp0FWb0AAZipk?format=jpg
There's also numerous other strikers from the 90s and 00s who would dribble past the GK 100/100 times here. Situations like this were seen as the easiest you could have as a striker.
Now strikers simply don't have any confidence in their dribbling and go for long shots.