RedCafe's Top 20 (30) by Position | Please check out the last threadmark

[Enigma_87]

Some more names thrown out there to be considered for the categories(not necessarily must haves but food for thought):

#10
Piksi Stojkovic
Bergkamp
Enzo Francescoli
Giancarlo Antognoni
Cesar Cueto

CM
Valderrama
Guardiola
Carrick
Ocwirk

 

[harms]

Probably Rui Costa and Zidane as midfielder playmakers too.

That's what I'm afraid of. Once we do this, we can put Platini to playmakers, Zico to forwards and get rid of the category altogether
It gets really hard to get a clear definition of a number 10 though.

 

[harms]

Gazza & Pogba for playmakers?

Pogba surely, if he'll make anyone's list. Gazza is already counted as a box-to-box due to @Šjor Bepo's lobbying (well, he made a great case for him).

 

[harms]

I have a feeling that we're not going to start any time soon

 

[Physiocrat]

Looking back the previous categorisation attempts. I think this is the best template to go forwards.

DLPs & Playmaking CMs

Attacking Midfielders & Classic #10s

Traditional Wingers

Forwards (bad name but it is to distinguish players who are mostly about the goals and not that creative such as CR7. If your more creative you go into creative forwards, such as Messi)

Creative Forwards

Strikers

The question here is can we distinguish classic 10s from midfield playmakers. My initial thought is yes but firstly it might be worth listing the quality players who would definitely fit the category of classic 10 to see whether it's worth separating them.

Maradona
Zidane
Platini
Laudrup
Rivelino
Rui Costa
Riquelme

Are there any others who are great and wouldn't be controversial to put here? I'd put Zico in the creative forward category given his style and average position

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

1. Pure Strikers
2. Central attackers (anyone who is a pure No.10 or offers more than a pure striker. Everyone from Diego to Pele and Totti to Del Piero.)
3. Wide attackers (Wingers and wide forwards)
4. Play makers (Any player that is considered a liability defensively in a draft midfield)

Keep it simple.

 

[Physiocrat]

1. Pure Strikers
2. Central attackers (anyone who is a pure No.10 or offers more than a pure striker. Everyone from Diego to Pele and Totti to Del Piero.)
3. Wide attackers (Wingers and wide forwards)
4. Play makers (Any player that is considered a liability defensively in a draft midfield)

Keep it simple.

I would want to distinguish between a Giggs/ Figo type from a Stoichkov or Blokhin as they perform somewhat different role. I put forwards generically to cover wider and more central players based mostly on their function (I originally called it goalscoring forwards) rather than position on the pitch.

 

[harms]

Creative forwards category just adds to the confusion of the number 10 argument.

10s (Zico, Maradona) - Wingers (Figo, Giggs) - Forwards (Messi, Stoichkov) - Strikers (van Basten, Müller), I think it's going to be like that.

I'll look for a voting options and make a survey on all the questionable names in-between playmakers and number 10s. It's probably going to be on google — caf's polls aren't really suited for that.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

I would want to distinguish between a Giggs/ Figo type from a Stoichkov or Blokhin as they perform somewhat different role. I put forwards generically to cover wider and more central players based mostly on their function (I originally called it goalscoring forwards) rather than position on the pitch.

Yea I get that, but having too many categories spoils the most important purpose which is comparison.

Edit: Actually, the 4 options listed above look good

 

[Šjor Bepo]

Creative forwards category just adds to the confusion of the number 10 argument.

10s (Zico, Maradona) - Wingers (Figo, Giggs) - Forwards (Messi, Stoichkov) - Strikers (van Basten, Müller), I think it's going to be like that.

I'll look for a voting options and make a survey on all the questionable names in-between playmakers and number 10s. It's probably going to be on google — caf's polls aren't really suited for that.

that looks good.

 

[Enigma_87]

Creative forwards category just adds to the confusion of the number 10 argument.

10s (Zico, Maradona) - Wingers (Figo, Giggs) - Forwards (Messi, Stoichkov) - Strikers (van Basten, Müller), I think it's going to be like that.

I'll look for a voting options and make a survey on all the questionable names in-between playmakers and number 10s. It's probably going to be on google — caf's polls aren't really suited for that.

Yeah, works.

Zico and Pele for example occupied the same zones, Maradona arguably too, but in Pele and Zico's case they are also a goalscorers which makes it difficult to pin down so either having them in two categories is not optimal.

In the above case the only question to me is where to put Ronaldinho - 10's and Wingers or just in one category?

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

In the above case the only question to me is where to put Ronaldinho - 10's and Wingers or just in one category?

I'd put him wherever Messi goes. Forwards as per above categories

 

[harms]

By the way, pretty much a typical performance by Sívori — and even though he scored 4 goals, I'd say that he was playing pretty much as a number 10. That is a bit of a weird formation for a 1961, but they've played like that.

Altafini
Corso - Sívori - number 7
Angelillo - Trap
LB - Maldini - CB - RB
Buffon​

 

[Enigma_87]

I'd put him wherever Messi goes. Forwards as per above categories

So basically the wing forwards will go in the forwards category and traditional wingers will go in the wingers category?

That works I guess.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

By the way, pretty much a typical performance by Sívori — and even though he scored 4 goals, I'd say that he was playing pretty much as a number 10. That is a bit of a weird formation for a 1961, but they've played like that.

Altafini
Corso - Sívori - number 7
Angelillo - Trap
LB - Maldini - CB - RB
Buffon​

This game was against a real shit team IIRC. Saw this long ago on footballia. Or maybe just the goals, don't remember.

 

[harms]

This game was against a real shit team IIRC. Saw this long ago on footballia. Or maybe just the goals, don't remember.

Obviously. Although they were quite decent considering what I expected of them (basically a random pub's 5-a-side), just completely ran out of steam after the 60th minute.

 

[Enigma_87]

@harms that defensive action @6:00

 

[Gio]

Some rambling thoughts:

• I would tend to put any player who operated primarily in a four-man midfield as an #8 here rather than a #10. So Prosinecki (Red Star 1991), Veron (Lazio circa 2000), Gazza (Spurs, Rangers, England), Brady (Arsenal) as midfield playmakers. If they were more likely to be deployed as the second striker in a 4-4-1-1 set-up, then they should be a #10 rather than an #8.
• Same for guys who clearly played in deeper positions, kick-starting moves - Netzer, Overath, Veron, Scholes, etc.
• Zidane and Iniesta should be in the same group. There's quite a clear group there of classic #10s. It gets tricky when you include the more direct #9.5 types. It's not easy to compare pure creators with end product types (eg Kaka, Litmanen, even Zico/Pele).
• Deco as an #8 / midfield playmaker if we mesh his Porto, Barcelona and Chelsea roles together.
• Peak Ronaldinho was the left side of a three-man attack, he has to go in there rather than a #10 category.

 

[DVG7]

Honestly not sure how to categorize Iniesta but it’s definitely not as a number 10. Too much of his better work came from the left side. He’d maybe be the best LCM in history in my eyes, and he brought new meaning to the all inclusiveness of that role.

 

[Šjor Bepo]

All most advanced(most free) from the midfield three id put in the n10 category as they are closer to them then to likes of Xavi, Scholes and Pirlo.

 

[harms]

Yeah, he was definitely a left-sided attacking midfielder at his best in terms of position, but his role was probably closer to that of a number 10 than to any of other classical roles like midfield playmaker or a winger. A weird case but we probably should put him with the 10s like we put Lampard in the b2b list.

 

[Physiocrat]

What's happening with this?

 

[harms]

We'll have a vote on playmakers whenever I'll have a bit of a free time and a reminder

 

[harms]

Will do the vote at the end of the week.

 

[harms]

We need to decide, which player should go to which list, so I've created a survey. It's a huge list as I've tried to include everyone who can vaguely fit into this category, so feel free to skip the ones that you don't have a strong opinion about.

https://forms.gle/cBqRo98aP7yJK4P26

 

[Synco]

Good stuff @harms, that should get us to the vote soon.

Only one thing I have trouble with in this framework are those who often played as wide playmakers (like Nedved, Ronaldinho). Not really wingers, not classic #10s, and at least Nedved is no forward either. But since we do midfield playmakers first, there'll probably be time to discuss these few cases individually.

The trequartista problem (#10s or forwards?) will never be solved, but at least we can just vote & be done with it.

 

[harms]

Only one thing I have trouble with in this framework are those who often played as wide playmakers (like Nedved, Ronaldinho). Not really wingers, not classic #10s, and at least Nedved is no forward either. But since we do midfield playmakers first, there'll probably be time to discuss these few cases individually.

The trequartista problem (#10s or forwards?) will never be solved, but at least we can just vote & be done with it.

The forwards lists are going to have wingers, forwards & strikers, so this option leaves them for later. With wingers not being completely limited to the likes of Matthews and forwards being a very wide category, I think we'll find a suitable list for them.

 

[Gio]

Are we having a wide midfielders category or are the likes of Beckham, Giggs, Michel, Nedved etc falling into the winger category?

 

[harms]

Are we having a wide midfielders category or are the likes of Beckham, Giggs, Michel, Nedved etc falling into the winger category?

I don't want to split it even further: wingers - forwards - strikers. So all of those are going to be wingers in my book. There's going to be a similar vote on who goes where later, especially focusing on the likes of Blokhin/Stoichkov etc.

 

[Gio]

I don't want to split it even further: wingers - forwards - strikers. So all of those are going to be wingers in my book. There's going to be a similar vote on who goes where later, especially focusing on the likes of Blokhin/Stoichkov etc.

Sounds sensible.

 

[Synco]

Keep the poll open until friday and start the MF playmakers thread at the weekend?

 

[harms]

Yeah.

 

[Synco]

Great that we got this going again!

Just to be clear: as far as I understand it, voting is not restricted to the players in the OP's playmakers list - it's just that those in the other two lists aren't available. For example, unlisted candidates I can think of are these two Italians:

Ancelotti, Albertini

There are probably some more. If anyone got further suggestions, post them here - or simply in your lists, as everyone can see them there too.

 

[harms]

Just to be clear: as far as I understand it, voting is not restricted to the players in the OP's playmakers list - it's just that those in the other two lists aren't available. For example, unlisted candidates I can think of are these two Italians:

Yep.

 

[Enigma_87]

@harms do we rate the players on their playmaking ability or generally as players?

Prime example is Nedved - I wouldn't put him near top 20 of all time in terms of playmaking ability, but he will most likely featuring in most of the lists in the top 20.

 

[harms]

@Physiocrat top 30, if you want to. I've expanded the list of admissions for central midfielders and will continue with this with attackers, since the choice is much broader.

@harms do we rate the players on their playmaking ability or generally as players?

Prime example is Nedved - I wouldn't put him near top 20 of all time in terms of playmaking ability, but he will most likely featuring in most of the lists in the top 20.

Generally as players. I quite dislike that Nedved ended up in this category, but this is probably the only big miss (in my opinion) from the poll.

 

[Physiocrat]

@harms Thanks for the clarification. The Top 20 was tough enough so I think I will pass on extending it to 30.

 

[Synco]

Generally as players. I quite dislike that Nedved ended up in this category, but this is probably the only big miss (in my opinion) from the poll.

I actually think we should consider moving him, at least if we find a suitable way to define wide players.

Not sure if people voting in the poll thought this really is the best category for him, or if they just voted for the least unacceptable compromise available. I don't even remember if I voted on him, but I definitely had that problem.

 

[Indnyc]

I actually think we should consider moving him, at least if we find a suitable way to define wide players.

Not sure if people voting in the poll thought this really is the best category for him, or if they just voted for the least unacceptable compromise available. I don't even remember if I voted on him, but I definitely had that problem.

The option was Midfield playmakers, No.10, and forward.. Felt he was best suited as a playmaker than the other 2 categories..

Depends on how we define wide players he could definitely fit in that category

 

[harms]

The option was Midfield playmakers, No.10, and forward.. Felt he was best suited as a playmaker than the other 2 categories..

Depends on how we define wide players he could definitely fit in that category

Forwards include 3 lists — wingers, forwards and strikers, I've clarified it multiple times in the main thread, but maybe I wasn't clear enough.