I thought there was a bit more time on this one, was gonna vote on my lunch break
Road Trip Draft II QF: Jim Beam vs harms
- Thread starter Moby
- Start date
Any thoughts on the game? We have so little neutral involvement lately — both in terms of the comments and the votes themselves.
Congrats @harms . I've calmed down Neeskens after he was fuming being played as a defensive shield all game. 
I purposely didn't vote in this match since it was too hard to split the two sides. Both were similar sort of formations so it made me compare players playing in the same positions. Both teams had advantages in different areas so it was a bit too close to call on the whole. Di Stefano almost won my vote.
Congrats @harms . I've calmed down Neeskens after he was fuming being played as a defensive shield all game.
He needs to change that shirt.Neeskens does seem to be going through a vague phase in this draft. @Gio made a lot of the same arguments Harms is making and I personally disagree with both of them.
His best came as an attacking B2B for me and he stands below the likes of Keane/Tigana in my eyes as a balanced B2B with a fairly significant amount of defensive responsibilities.
I'd put him ahead of both as a balanced option, but the best use of him definitely highlights his goalscoring, that I'd agree with.
Neeskens does seem to be going through a vague phase in this draft. @Gio made a lot of the same arguments Harms is making and I personally disagree with both of them.
His best came as an attacking B2B for me and he stands below the likes of Keane/Tigana in my eyes as a balanced B2B with a fairly significant amount of defensive responsibilities.
I've been awful for this lately. I saw this one as a draw, with you having the superior defence and Di Stefano giving Jim more control and off-the-ball workrate, but in general I'm just not voting that much, and I routinely start to type out a comment on match threads and then realise that I just couldn't be bothered finishing it.
There's nothing in Neeskens off-the-ball game that makes me think he'd not be in his element playing an all-round box-to-box central midfield role. He had all of the energy, drive and self-sacrifice required. Now if you look at the set-up he had with Ajax/Holland or how I used him in our draft game, he had a pivot behind him in a three that helped to release him to press, push and drive forward. And that's common because a lot of the great box-to-box midfielders played next to more reserved players who deferred to their greatness which generally meant giving them more attacking freedom - Matthaus (Inter), Neeskens, Gerrard (Liverpool), Lampard (Chelsea), Tigana (Bordeaux and France). Slightly different how he's deployed here, alongside Falcao, a partnership that has been used a few times now, but looks okay to me - both well rounded and balanced and capable of taking control of things against just about any potential opposition unit.
Neeskens does seem to be going through a vague phase in this draft. @Gio made a lot of the same arguments Harms is making and I personally disagree with both of them.
His best came as an attacking B2B for me and he stands below the likes of Keane/Tigana in my eyes as a balanced B2B with a fairly significant amount of defensive responsibilities.
Would be fine if they weren't facing a #10, but against someone like Di Stefano they definitely need an anchor there.
Firstly, I don't disagree that he is not in his element in this role.
But then comparison wise, the likes of Matthaus, Keane were more apt to play a balanced role. They have actually had roles where they have played the primary role of marking great AMs. Is there a game where Neeskens actually was asked to do that? Historically, I am not aware of any.
I don't mind Neeskens in a double pivot at all. In the era of Zonal marking, he is very much perfect there. But the partner has to be right. Falcao for me doesn't qualify. Both of Falcao/Neeskens need a more defensive partner alongside them in my ideal lineup. Pair him with say Tigana and I wouldn't have a problem. As a partnership, that is very balanced.
I don't mind him in front of Hierro too, but in our game the Dynamics were different. I still disagree that Neeskens is a better balanced option than Bastian for example (who again marked a GOAT AM successfully)
I don't disagree with most of that. Generally the best circumstances to play Falcao/Neeskens together would be in a 3-5-2 where you have that extra defensive cover to free up the midfield, or with some clear defensive support elsewhere in the midfield unit to help out.
Aye, that pair is perfect for a 3-5-2
I was edging towards your team because of the midfield, contrary to the comments so far I think they would make a great double pivot. Though I do rate Falcao's defensive game higher than most here.