See for me George Best is one of the absolute greatest footballers of all time. What he achieved in his era with the conditions available, such as the equipment and the pitches, you would think nobody could ever be better. He was above everyone at that time.
Nevertheless, I realize that even in League One today there are players who are faster than him, have better ball control than him, a better shot and a better reading of the game.
You have to see it all in context. It's completely natural that a player who trained half as often, ate as much as he wanted and had an overall unhealthier lifestyle than a player today who has his own athletic trainer, nutritionists and overall better conditions cannot be at this level. More talent alone cannot compensate for something like this. It has nothing to do with recency bias.
At the moment I feel that way about Messi and I can't imagine there will ever be a player better than him. But the game and its conditions will evolve, the top players will be bred and treated like robots with the best technologies, coaches, nutrition, supplements, equipment and so on and there will s be players who will take it to an even higher level than Messi.
I spent a large portion of the 2019/2020 season watching league one Peterborough at their ground. I saw the best teams in the league at the time come there. I can 100% assure you there were no players who possessed the ball control, skill or game reading of George Best. Honestly i dont even understand why you even made such a ridiculous false equivalence. I get you're trying to back your side and prove a point but that is absolute nonsense. The football at league one level is as basic as it comes. Peterborough were actually probably the best side. I saw Portsmouth and Rotherham (who were above them at the time) and they were both awful to watch sides. It was all long ball kick and rush football. Almost every player had basic skill set. The only exceptional player I ever saw in League One during that period was Ivan Toney. There was absolutely no players I saw amongst a dozen or so teams who had anywhere near the level of footballing ability as George Best.
Just take the top 7 teams of the top 4 leagues.
The coaching staff today is 3 times larger than back then with experts in every area. Data analysis and video analysis is way more advanced.
Don't you think it's logical that teams today play at a different tactical level than they did 20 years ago?
And the players today, who are trained from an early age under the microscope in the academies, are certainly no worse.
Btw I'm not saying that football is better to watch today. It's just getting harder and harder for the good players to shine because the tactical systems kill that individuality. That's why Ronaldinho was so beautiful to watch. Today he wouldn't have these freedoms.
Manchester United of 2018-2024 would therefore fall into this category. As would Tottenham and Newcastle of recent years. We can go to Italy, Germany, Spain and we'd find top 7 sides such as RB Leipzig, Fiorentina, Roma, Lazio, Villarreal.
And what you're telling me is that all of these sides would defeat and are better than the likes of
(Chelsea of 2004 -2006), (Milan of 2003-2007) (Arsenal 2002-2004) (Madrid 2000-2003) because they have more coaches, tactics and data analysis....
Now say that sentence to yourself and keep a straight face.
The Manchester United team of 2021 which finished 2nd in the PL was a team of
Degea, AWB, Maguire, Lindelof, Shaw, Mctominay, Fred, Bruno, Rashford, Martial, Greenwood and what you're saying is that this group of players are superior to teams that featured players such as
Henry, Pires, Vieira, Raul, Figo, Zidane, Makelele, Terry, Lampard, Cech, Maldini, Seedorf, Pirlo, Kaka.
Again, say that sentence to yourself and keep a straight face.
I think you, like a lot of people, are hugely deluded about the modern day tactical evolvement of football and how widespread it is. You and many others make the fatal mistake of evidencing something that applies to only a handful of teams.... to every team in the world. Just because Manchester City, Liverpool, Bayern, Arsenal are so well tactically and stylistically drilled does not mean every other team is. FFs you support Man Utd ( i think). We've finished 2nd and 3rd in one of supposedly the most difficult leagues in the world with every tom dick and harry pointing out that we have very little structure and tactics to our game and have got by on individual talents. The fact you tried to use League One as an example says it all.
It's the same stupid arguments I see about how
"everyone plays high press now and runs loads so football is harder and better". Do they feck? Man united don't play that way, Atletico Madrid don't, Dortmund don't, Spurs didn't pre Ange, Milan don't, Betis don't... these are all sides in the top 7 of the top four leagues in the world.
Serie A in the 90's 00's was known for having tactically obsessed coaches. The club who have won the CL in 2 of the last 3 seasons we know have a manager who is not tactically obsessed. It's fecking hilarious that people think tactics are a modern phenomenon.
People are also weirdly obsessed with pointing out how large coaching staff is and how sports science and this and that mean football has evolved so much. How many of these staff will actually have a day by day or game by game impact on what the players do on a matchday for 90 mins ? If you've got a squad of 22, what use is it to have I don't know 7 fitness coaches? Its quality over quantity and more doesn't always mean better. I've made this comment before on here but It doesn't matter how many physios, fitness coaches or sports science staff Man United hire. Marcus Rashford is never going to run more than David Beckham...
Someone said a few lines up ( cant remember) but we're literally talking only 20-25 years ago. Things really haven't evolved that much since then. We are not talking about the 70's 80's where players were playing on horrific pitches, players had to retire from minor injuries or players were bladdered most matchdays and a large portion of games descended into pinball.
No but seriously, I mean
