This is a really basic overview on how I think the game looks different, and some of the different demands of the players
It's definitely changed quite a bit, you mentioned the passing between keepers and defenders, and this has definitely led to an increase in the technical capabilities of the backline. The role of the fullback has evolved massive over that time frame, and your CBs in the top flight have to be fairly competent on the ball, especially with so many teams employing a press, and also the requirement of playing it out from the back being such an integral part of many teams approach. This isn't to say these players didn't exist a couple of decades ago, of course they did, but it wasn't as ubiquitous as it is now.
One of the big changes is the speed of the game. It's far faster than it was back then, players make double the high intensity runs that they did a couple decades ago, while covering a lot more ground on average. This is both down to tactical shifts, and the more holistic approach to training that has led to fitter players on average. The game being quicker makes it harder, and this is coupled with the fact that the ball spends a lot more time on the ground than it did back then, with teams making a lot more passes than they did back then. Like the backline this isn't to say there weren't plenty of players back then capable of hitting the same heights in today's football, just that it's a very different game that required different strengths and approaches. A number 9 from today might struggle back then due to a lack of aerial prowess, and a number 9 could struggle today if they had a lack of link up play. Whereas you'd get some players who'd fit in perfectly in both eras, like a Keane.
You don't even need to go back to the 90s, watching a game from the mid 2000s and watching one from today it's amazing how apparent the differences are, you don't really notice them as the season progress and incremental changes are made, but it's staggering how different the football looks.
And another bit about the changes
I know what you mean, but while they're different facets of the game they do impact each other massively. Technical football becomes harder when the speed of the game is increased, everything from your first touch, distribution, dribbling is made significantly harder.
https://sciencenordic.com/denmark-f...sts-football-has-changed-dramatically/1440511
That's only from a comparison from the mid noughties, but it shows they way football has moved to in the PL.
Of course there will be plenty of players from bygone eras who played in similar roles, but it's less about individuals and more about evaluating the league as a whole. If you look back to the year you mentioned, the vast majority of sides in the country played with out and out wingers. Whereas in today's football most sides rely on their fullbacks to provide the width, as true wingers are much more of a rarity these days. Managers often opt for inside forwards and players who can play in the half spaces, and this has led to fullbacks becoming much more involved in the attacking side of the game as they've had to take on the responsibility of wingers.
Attacking fullbacks has always been a thing in football, and there was a resurgence of them when Roberto Carlos and Cafu became household names. There are plenty of individuals who functioned as important cogs of the attack, but if you look at the league as a whole it was far less common than it is today.
Gary Neville wrote a great piece last year explaining how the role has changed. It's well worth a read.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...neville-how-full-backs-have-evolved-over-time
It's hard to compare between eras as the style of football was so different. I don't necessarily disagree with the evaluations you've made here, but the demands are very different. Martial is very technically gifted, and Pogba is wonderfully talented when it comes to technique, this doesn't necessarily translate to winning things though. The argument you're making isn't really a fair one, it would be like me saying if technique was so great back then how come United kept winning with Nicky Butt in midfield? He was a fine player but doesn't match up to Pogba technically, but it would be incorrect of me to use this as an assertion to evaluate an entire league's standard of football.
Someone like Cantona could play in any era, but it's about how football has changed in the league rather than individuals. A world class player will be world class in any era.
How much do you think top level football has changed over the last 20 years? How much do you think it ever changes generally? Are the popular tactical systems of today demonstrably different from from those of the past in either approach or effect? Or is it the case (as I've seen suggested by some posters) that something like "pressing" is just a buzzword for things teams were doing decades ago anyway and there's nothing new about any of these supposedly modern ideas and approaches?
My reply to the argument that there is nothing different would be this from another thread
" Everything in football is recycled, I've spoken about how pressing has become such a ubiquitous part of the PL but we had Rinus Michels brilliant Dutch side employing a high octane press in 1974 with a high line, Arrigo Sacchi's Milan was heavily inspired by Michels, but applied their own pressing system involving zonal marking and greater compactness. These systems have heavily inspired modern football and we can see their essence in Guardiola's Barcelona and the sides that came afterwards, where he built his own style from the blueprints of his predecessors, using his 6 second rule to regain control of the ball and then relying on the compact shape to stop counters if unsuccessful. Klopp's spin was to instead of relying on the press as a strategy to stop counters, or regain control of the ball, was to use it as an offensive strategy in order to create chances during the transitional period before the opponents can regain shape.
Every era of football is different, and heavily recycled, with approaches that may have gone out of fashion being once again reintroduced, or a manager puts his own innovative spin on one of the classics. Every period has it's own strengths and unique style, so when I say the technical standard in the PL player for player is better now than it was in the 90s, it's not as a derogatory remark but an acknowledgement of how the game has changed"
Also if we take SAF's time (which was nearly decade ago at this point), do you think the way top level football functions and is coached has actively evolved since then? Or (again as I've seen some suggest) would SAF be successful now doing exactly what he did in the past, because he didn't need these supposedly modern concepts and approaches then so there's no reason he'd need them now?
It has changed, but it was also changing massively during his time too. He would have no problem (age not withstanding). Others have mentioned his ability to adapt and they're spot on. It doesn't sound much but it conveys so much. Adapting isn't just looking at what everyone else is doing, it's the ability to understand these trends, the effect they have on the game, how they could be applied, how they could be negated, what would be needed to implement them, what qualities would be needed in his individual footballers, how it could be amended, and honestly so much more. He was an absolute genius at this, coupled with his ability to find exactly the right personnel he needed to accomplish this, both on and off the pitch, and his innate ability at getting everyone else to sing to his tune he would absolutely rise to the challenge.
He wouldn't be successful now doing exactly what he did in the past, but he would adapt to the point where he could. You could send Ferguson 100 years into the future and if you gave him a couple of years he'd be challenging.
On a slightly separate topic, I think the changes through those 20 years interesting, speaking solely about tactical changes through the PL period, there's been many shifts even if we're using your 20 year period net. This is why I'll be ignoring shifts in the 90s such as the back pass rule and the effect that had, as well as some of Ferguson's early methods and the effects that had, while just looking at the biggest shifts imo. Wenger's football had a big impact, a lot gets talked about off the pitch stuff but the way in which individuals were used were pretty interesting. Pires was nominally a winger, but the usual set up was a winger featuring on the flank in they had their strongest foot. Pires was an inverted winger before it was super common, who featured on the left while cutting in to using his right. Allowing him to become more of a consistent goal threat than many of his peers, and also vacating space for Henry and a bombarding Ashley Cole. Wenger did a lot of interesting stuff with his side for the time, and while not as holistic an approach as the shifts to come, it was definitely an influential tactical shift.
Mourinho came in with the Mourinho 4-3-3 and changed the game massively. Sounds so simple but it really did have a massive influence. Other games had tinkered with one striker, or in the case of Fergie and Wenger having a partnership in which one of the strikers often functioned as a de facto cam. His use of Makelele allowed his other midfielders more freedom, and the numerical advantages his shape was massively beneficial in all facets of the game, allowing them to score at a good rate and helped them with their incredible defensive record.
Steve Bruce Conte. Three at the back wasn't unheard of in the PL, I've seen a few different sides in the 90s employing it, Van Gaal I think used it on occasion, and Bruce used it at Hull fairly often. But I'd give the credit to Conte for making this formation mainstream and using it consistently. When traditional wingers were very out of fashion, this formation allowed for the classic use of wingers that hugged the touchline. A player in the wrong era like Moses being given a second lease at life as a wingback. It allows for combinations in wide areas, while not vacating central areas. It's useful for stopping being caught out in transitional moments as the two central midfielders (Kante and Matic initially) are given freedom to negate this while being covered. the wingbacks allow freedom for the inside forwards (such as Hazard and Pedro) to move around the pitch to find space and offer passing opportunities. It also helps in bypassing oppositional pressing which had come into fashion by this point. The formation was often derided as a formation that was used to help mask defensive vulnerabilities, but Conte's was much more than that.
Klopp,Guardiola. We all know what they've brought to the PL. Pep wasn't the first Cruyff acolyte in English/Welsh football though.
Martinez, 33, February 2007. Revolutionised not only Swansea, not only British football, but the entire world. Guardiola often cites Swansea as his biggest example in football, and the club has (sometimes) focused on managers with a similar ethos, Rodgers (at the time), Laudrup , Potter, my boy Martin.
