The decline of center back talent

[Ludens the Red]

I think CBs are better now because of the demands that are placed upon them to play high up the pitch in isolation which requires the modern CB to resist/enforce high pressure and defend space high up the pitch.

Unless you adopt a reactive style I can't see many legends from the past being effective under a coach today who favours high pressure, fast transitions.

I’ll name some of the best defenders of say between 2000-2010.
Nesta, Cannavaro, Puyol, Pique, Terry, Carvalho, Rio, Vidic, Stam, Lucio, Campbell, Maldini, Thuram. Out of curiosity who are these legions of defenders currently playing who are better than the above mentioned?

I also think you’re making the classic mistake that a lot of people in this thread have done where you pretend everyone plays and defends like Man City, Barcelona and Bayern Liverpool (only in the last season and a bit) . Not everyone actually plays with a ridiculously high line as it’s high risk.
Plenty of big teams do not play with such a high line and these teams are still not producing top defenders.

 

[poleglass red]

The majority of defenders in yesteryear never had to play in such taxing defensive systems as the one's today do. The majority of teams played deep/medium lines with one sometimes two DM's Infront of them and there was no serious demand for them to play out. These days they're expected to split across the pitch, play out from the back, while the fullbacks bomb on and not only that the preference for the man Infront tends to be a more DLP type of player than a traditional DM.

An example in reverse would be the wingers, these days they seem to be much more appreciated as the general preference for one up front pushes them closer to goal and allows them to pad up on their end product numbers whereas back in yesteryear even the bonafide world class wingers were lucky if they hit double figures.

Defenders back in the day typically played against 2 strikers in a much more physical league, so I do feel there was more a focus on actual defending, ie win the ball and give it to your teammates who can do some damage. Now typically teams play one up front, some don't even play a real 9, so you have 2 central defenders covering 1 central striker, thus having more time and space on the ball, therefore they need to be comfortable in bringing it forward.There has always been central defenders over the years who were comfortable on the ball, but now that's nearly the prerequisite for them, certainly for specific managers.

 

[Adnan]

I’ll name some of the best defenders of say between 2000-2010.
Nesta, Cannavaro, Puyol, Pique, Terry, Carvalho, Rio, Vidic, Stam, Lucio, Campbell, Maldini, Thuram. Out of curiosity who are these legions of defenders currently playing who are better than the above mentioned?

I also think you’re making the classic mistake that a lot of people in this thread have done where you pretend everyone plays and defends like Man City, Barcelona and Bayern Liverpool (only in the last season and a bit) . Not everyone actually plays with a ridiculously high line as it’s high risk.
Plenty of big teams do not play with such a high line.

I would take Van Dyke over all the CBs you've mentioned because I would favour a highline and Van Dyke is also very strong in a deeper defensive line. It pains me to say this as a united fan but i've never seen a CB in the EPL reach the level of Van Dyke.

Most teams who adopt a proactive approach employ a highline. And it's not just the big teams but rather teams like Gladbach, Leipzig, Dortmund etc who do the same and adopt a very attack minded approach. I clearly made the distinction in my OP so i'm not making the classic mistake as you put it. It's easier to defend in a collective manner rather than in isolation.

The last two winners of the UCL have set the bar and standards and I don't need to tell you how they set their stall. All i'm saying is that it's easier to defend in a deeper defensive line rather than a high defensive line because in a higher line there is high risk because the objective is to sacrifice defensive stability for goals which puts alot of pressure on CBs.

 

[Ludens the Red]

I would take Van Dyke over all the CBs you've mentioned because I would favour a highline and Van Dyke is also very strong in a deeper defensive line. It pains me to say this as a united fan but i've never seen a CB in the EPL reach the level of Van Dyke.

Most teams who adopt a proactive approach employ a highline. And it's not just the big teams but rather teams like Gladbach, Leipzig, Dortmund etc who do the same and adopt a very attack minded approach. I clearly made the distinction in my OP so i'm not making the classic mistake as you put it. It's easier to defend in a collective manner rather than in isolation.

The last two winners of the UCL have set the bar and standards and I don't need to tell you how they set their stall. All i'm saying is that it's easier to defend in a deeper defensive line rather than a high defensive line because in a higher line there is high risk because the objective is to sacrifice defensive stability for goals which puts alot of pressure on CBs.

The fact you only named one defender kinda says it all. Also you could have spelt his name right
Van Dijk is obviously world class and wouldn’t look out of place with the names I mentioned but there simply aren’t many, which is my fundamental point.

Of course it’s easier to defend in a deeper defence, I even said it but it doesn’t automatically mean that makes defenders better now. I mean what’s the point of city playing as they did on Sunday with Ake and Garcia and Mendy if they’re defending like that.

Also in terms of the last two CL winners, I’m not sure that’s relevant, do the before years of Real/Atletico/Juve finals not count or something ? Those clubs didn’t play an aggressively high line. Bayern and Liverpool are brilliant and have been over the last year/two playing as they have but then you’ve got Barcelona and City who both had embarrassing seasons .

This all falls back into this idea that there’s a ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ way to play football. There isn’t and just because some defenders are playing in high systems I don’t think means that therefore they’re better than defenders of old.
What is telling is the amount of basic errors defenders make.

I think you have to ask what does a high line have to do with Thiago Silvas mistake against West Brom?
What does a high line have to do with Lindelof being afraid to head the ball every game?
What did a high line have to do with Man City giving away three idiotic penalties on Sunday?
And what did a high line have to do with Barcelona defenders taking half an hour to notice Liverpool had taken a corner in a Semi Final of a Champions league tie ?

 

[Murray3007]

Maybe it's because there's a better class of attackers around today. Faster, smarter, & more clinical.

not sure about that, if you were to pick the top 25 strikers in prem history there wouldn't be to much from this era, maybe Aguero, look at just us Rooney, Ronaldo, Tevez, Berbatov, Saha, that's without even going near the likes of Henry, Drogba etc

 

[Powderfinger]

I don't think its just the high line that makes it hard for CBs today. Its also the decline of traditional wingers and the emphasis on using attacking fullbacks or wingbacks to give you width in attack. That puts a lot more onus on central defenders (whether in a two, or the side CBs in a three man backline) to defend in space against very quick forwards. Even teams that don't play a very high line end up needing their CBs to defend in the channels a lot because of their offensive tactics. This is a big change from the days when fullbacks stayed home and a CB could reliably know that the space outside was covered by somebody else and they just needed to read the game and handle the relatively compressed space in the center of the pitch.

The ideal modern CB basically has to be a freak, especially in the Premier League - agile and quick enough to defend in space against the likes of Sterling, Mane, or Rashford 1-v-1; physical and big enough to dominate aerially against the Burnleys of the world that will just pump crosses into your box looking for the heads of their tall, muscular players; and talented enough on the ball to beat a high press or act as a deep lying playmaker in possession against a side that sits back.

Finding a player like Van Dijk who checks all these boxes at a very high level is like looking for a unicorn. This is why Arsenal were willing to pay 27m for a kid like Saliba who isn't even ready to start Carabao Cup matches or why United were considering buying Badioshile.

 

[TwoSheds]

They are currently (unless you play for Hodgson) needed to be able to play 1v1 and 2v2 against agile/physical attackers...
Like VVD, Joe Gomez, David Alaba, Boateng, Ake or Rio back in the day.

Like literally every United pairing under Fergie then. Bruce and Pallister, Rio and Vidic, Johnsen and Stam etc etc...it really hasn't changed, the tactics with the ball have changed that's it. If anything the defending should be easier now because most teams play 3 midfielders including a DM now when previously many teams just played 2 box to box players.

 

[Lebo]

Why are people talking like these generations don’t everlap? Who are these great attackers in recent times that triumph United’s Tevez Ronaldo Rooney? Or Messi Eto’o Henry?

Terry, Chiellini, Puyol, Godin, Pepe etc played in both eras and did just as good.

 

[Adnan]

The fact you only named one defender kinda says it all. Also you could have spelt his name right
Van Dijk is obviously world class and wouldn’t look out of place with the names I mentioned but there simply aren’t many, which is my fundamental point.

Of course it’s easier to defend in a deeper defence, I even said it but it doesn’t automatically mean that makes defenders better now. I mean what’s the point of city playing as they did on Sunday with Ake and Garcia and Mendy if they’re defending like that.

Also in terms of the last two CL winners, I’m not sure that’s relevant, do the before years of Real/Atletico/Juve finals not count or something ? Those clubs didn’t play an aggressively high line. Bayern and Liverpool are brilliant and have been over the last year/two playing as they have but then you’ve got Barcelona and City who both had embarrassing seasons .

This all falls back into this idea that there’s a ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ way to play football. There isn’t and just because some defenders are playing in high systems I don’t think means that therefore they’re better than defenders of old.
What is telling is the amount of basic errors defenders make.

I think you have to ask what does a high line have to do with Thiago Silvas mistake against West Brom?
What does a high line have to do with Lindelof being afraid to head the ball every game?
What did a high line have to do with Man City giving away three idiotic penalties on Sunday?
And what did a high line have to do with Barcelona defenders taking half an hour to notice Liverpool had taken a corner in a Semi Final of a Champions league ?

I'm not sure which direction you're taking this discussion in and I never said there's only one way to play football. Players like Terry who you mention are completely unsuited to playing in a team that wants to implement a high pressure game and wouldn't even get into the current Leipzig team because their coach expects his CBs to enforce the press high up the pitch, so for coaches like Nagelsmann CBs like Konate and Upamecano are better. But reactive coaches like Mourinho may favour Terry. And thanks for correcting my mispelling of Van Dijk's name..

The rest of your post enforces my view that it's more difficult to play a higher line because if it was easy we wouldn't see the likes of City struggling to implement it succesfully . And the rest of your post is confusing bad defending, lack of focus and unsuitable players for a high risk approach. All those things you've mentioned have little to do with a high line but the things I've just mentioned.

 

[GatoLoco]

not sure about that, if you were to pick the top 25 strikers in prem history there wouldn't be to much from this era, maybe Aguero, look at just us Rooney, Ronaldo, Tevez, Berbatov, Saha, that's without even going near the likes of Henry, Drogba etc

Yes, but also think that many of the best forwards of the late era played out of the Premiership in recent times: Ronaldo, Messi, Luis Suarez, Neymar, Lewandowski, Bale, Benzema, Robben, Ribery, Müller, Cavani etc.

 

[Zehner]

Was thinking about this. Defending in the classical sense seems to be a dying art. Just look at the goals conceded in these few games.

I wouldn't go that far. Football is cyclical. 10 years ago, Guardiola's style was the benchmark. We've seen quite a shift since then. Look at Liverpool, they're playing lots and lots of long balls and crosses, outperforming their xG. They shouldn't be that good according to the metrics, yet they are. And they use tools that were deemed outdated for quite a long spell. We've also seen the three at the back becoming relevant again. Wing backs are becoming more and more relevant, too. You also see more and more wingers with their strong foot on the outside again instead of inverted wingers. The false 9 was deemed revolutionary by many when Pep started using Messi this way but the concept had been around since decades. It was just outfashioned for a very long time, Totti at Rome aside.

We're also witnessing midfielders in top teams that clearly aren't on the technical level you would expect but just hard workers. Goretzka at Bayern, Henderson at Liverpool, etc. I think the fascinating thing about football is that you can play it in so many different ways and top managers are exploring how you can make them work again. Of course you have your ideal type of player for each position in mind but if you have a player that excels at a discipline, you have to make that work. Alexander-Arnold for instance is an incredible crosser. Before Liverpool exploited it, it was a dead art most top managers considered as a last alternative at best. Now he's among the best assisters in the world as a defender. And they don't even have an aerial presence in the box like Cristiano.

 

[Libano]

I’ll name some of the best defenders of say between 2000-2010.
Nesta, Cannavaro, Puyol, Pique, Terry, Carvalho, Rio, Vidic, Stam, Lucio, Campbell, Maldini, Thuram. Out of curiosity who are these legions of defenders currently playing who are better than the above mentioned?

I also think you’re making the classic mistake that a lot of people in this thread have done where you pretend everyone plays and defends like Man City, Barcelona and Bayern Liverpool (only in the last season and a bit) . Not everyone actually plays with a ridiculously high line as it’s high risk.
Plenty of big teams do not play with such a high line and these teams are still not producing top defenders.

I have my doubts someone like John Terry would do as well in 2020 as he did back then. The game has moved on so much.

 

[Fosu-Mens]

Like literally every United pairing under Fergie then. Bruce and Pallister, Rio and Vidic, Johnsen and Stam etc etc...it really hasn't changed, the tactics with the ball have changed that's it. If anything the defending should be easier now because most teams play 3 midfielders including a DM now when previously many teams just played 2 box to box players.

It was important before, but even more important now for any teams attempting to play a high pressing/high line with two central defenders only.
Bruce 1v1 was problematic against mobile attackers, and these have become more the norm. Back in the days of Bruce and Pallister, the need for aerial abilities was more useful for top teams compared to today where the top teams attempting to dominate through possession and high press needing players able to handle 1v1s on the ground. Still, Pallister was not the slowest, so it worked. Both Johnsen and Stam were fast, Rio the same, while Vidic was not fast but not slow either.

Lindelof is not fast, nor is he strong enough to muscle the players off the ball. Maguire is extremely imobile. So neither are good enough for a 2 CB pairing with a good 1v1 defender as a partner. So, if in the future, hopefully, we start playing more progressive, high pressing football, we would need two new centre halfs...

 

[TwoSheds]

It was important before, but even more important now for any teams attempting to play a high pressing/high line with two central defenders only.
Bruce 1v1 was problematic against mobile attackers, and these have become more the norm. Back in the days of Bruce and Pallister, the need for aerial abilities was more useful for top teams compared to today where the top teams attempting to dominate through possession and high press needing players able to handle 1v1s on the ground. Still, Pallister was not the slowest, so it worked. Both Johnsen and Stam were fast, Rio the same, while Vidic was not fast but not slow either.

Lindelof is not fast, nor is he strong enough to muscle the players off the ball. Maguire is extremely imobile. So neither are good enough for a 2 CB pairing with a good 1v1 defender as a partner. So, if in the future, hopefully, we start playing more progressive, high pressing football, we would need two new centre halfs...

How much did you watch Bruce then?

 

[A-man]

I had to look at highlight material from old CL football. One thing is clear. The old defenders wouldn’t last many minutes on the pitch with that kind of horror tackles that were acceptable at that time.

 

[Fosu-Mens]

How much did you watch Bruce then?

Not that much, but enough to see that in his later seasons he was not a particularly mobile player.
Steve Bruce anno 1993/1994 season was not a slow player that would get exposed in 1v1 against some of the more pacy attackers of that time? Not that this happened often with central defenders at that time, compared to how many times Lindelof gets exposed to 1v1s, which I think is of more relevance to this discussion compared to the mobility of Steve Bruce.

 

[Tyrion]

I had to look at highlight material from old CL football. One thing is clear. The old defenders wouldn’t last many minutes on the pitch with that kind of horror tackles that were acceptable at that time.

I think that is partly why defenders these days seem worse. They basically can't defend individually without giving away fouls and even having hands and being in the penalty area seems to be grounds for a penalty now. They have to work as a team and press as a unit.

 

[VorZakone]

Italy are producing nothing anymore it pains to see me such a great footballing nation decline so much.

Actually discussed this with my mom. She used to know at least a couple of Italian players because they were world class and known to casual viewers. She says now she can't name a single player from the Italian national team.

 

[Rozay]

The first priority of central defenders nowadays is to keep possession and create chances. There are actually still very good defenders around, they just don’t play for the very best clubs. Clubs a little lower down buy central defenders to defend, at the top, they have all sorts of creative ideas and the job of the centre half seems to be just about everything except tackling, heading and dispossessing people. It actually seems to work very well too, up until the point when they are required to tackle, head the ball or dispossess someone. These seem to be the areas where centre halves are falling down. But they are great at everything else, so that’s what matters.

 

[tentan]

I don't think it has declined. If you go back and watch football from the 2000s the defending was just as bad.

 

[DoneDaDa]

I’ll name some of the best defenders of say between 2000-2010.
Nesta, Cannavaro, Puyol, Pique, Terry, Carvalho, Rio, Vidic, Stam, Lucio, Campbell, Maldini, Thuram. Out of curiosity who are these legions of defenders currently playing who are better than the above mentioned?

I'm not sure about if there better maybe some are on par but some top defenders in 2010-2020, Pique (mostly played after 2010), Ramos, VVD, Boeteng, Godin, Gimenez, Kompany, Varane, Maschrano, Chellini, Bouncci, Koulibaly, Silva, Vertonghen and Hummels.

 

[Murray3007]

Yes, but also think that many of the best forwards of the late era played out of the Premiership in recent times: Ronaldo, Messi, Luis Suarez, Neymar, Lewandowski, Bale, Benzema, Robben, Ribery, Müller, Cavani etc.

not sure I would go along with that, most of them had there best times years ago,

I have my doubts someone like John Terry would do as well in 2020 as he did back then. The game has moved on so much.

would argue against that look at hummels, pique and boating some of the slowest CB's in history of the game and yet they have all managed fine majority of the time.

 

[KirkDuyt]

There's just more coverage of football. We also see all the shite Monday evening games where no one can be arsed to their best. Or Evian against Vittel or Chaudfontaine or Pellegrino or whatever mineral water brand they named their club after in the ligue 1.

Football's also changed. 30 years ago a defender would just kick someone's leg and then kick the ball out of bounds. Now they are supposed to be able to play in a high line and full backs are all supposed to be Roberto Carlos.

absolute quality wise, everything and everyone is getting better if you ask me. Players are more fit, healthier, faster, stronger, tactics have evolved. Of course some generations aren't as good as others but saying football has regressed? naah.

 

[Jonesno.8]

Good thread this one, It certainly seems that the days on defences on top is a real thing of the past. The fitness and conditioning of the modern forward and player with the rules very much on their side makes it difficult for CBs to establish themselves. When you look at real top level options playing in the Prem, they are not that many real real top class. Context to 2008, We had Vidic and Rio, Chelsea had JT and Carvalho, Arsenal had just lost Campbell, Pool with Hyypia. Kompany comes in etc.

 

[Luke1995]

I was wondering, how high do you guys rank Baresi and Maldini ?

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Van Dijk, Varane, Laporte, Alaba, Ramos...

It's not really that bad in comparison to the golden generation of CBs in the 1990s and early 2000s. The CBs at that time are high profile for the good reasons too. Football development goes up and down, it's natural.

The 5 examples are just the top talents that are the closest but not really reach the levels of the best CBs generation except arguably Van Dijk. Laporte is annoyingly really good though if he play and personally I would include him once he play a lot of games. And then now and then you do get other good CBs that are good at doing both defending and passing eg. Bailly, Rojo and Soyuncu (just off the top of my head) but of course their consistency and actual quality is questionable.

The best top CBs are good not only at fundamentally defending, but also have good technical ability on the ball and having good physical abilities. That is a high standard and no way we can find many players having that.

 

[Reiver]

I was wondering, how high do you guys rank Baresi and Maldini ?

I'd rate them as two of the best defenders I've ever seen.
Maldini, I think was absolutely world class, and an all round excellent footballer. Arguably better at left back than CB because he could offer a lot going forward as well. One of my favourite players ever.
Baresi was just the consummate defender, also world class.I don't think he was that tall for a CB either.
I think both would stroll into any team you care to mention.

Its probably worth mentioning Costacurta at this point too. Often overlooked when compared to his two team mates above but also an excellent defender.

 

[reelworld]

I'd rate them as two of the best defenders I've ever seen.
Maldini, I think was absolutely world class, and an all round excellent footballer. Arguably better at left back than CB because he could offer a lot going forward as well. One of my favourite players ever.
Baresi was just the consummate defender, also world class.I don't think he was that tall for a CB either.
I think both would stroll into any team you care to mention.

Its probably worth mentioning Costacurta at this point too. Often overlooked when compared to his two team mates above but also an excellent defender.

Baresi is my height, and I'd be short in Europe
But Baresi is incredible reader of the game, and would never get out muscled by bigger strikers. Cannavaro was also like this. Short, but incredible center back

 

[Luke1995]

I'd rate them as two of the best defenders I've ever seen.
Maldini, I think was absolutely world class, and an all round excellent footballer. Arguably better at left back than CB because he could offer a lot going forward as well. One of my favourite players ever.
Baresi was just the consummate defender, also world class.I don't think he was that tall for a CB either.
I think both would stroll into any team you care to mention.

Its probably worth mentioning Costacurta at this point too. Often overlooked when compared to his two team mates above but also an excellent defender.

Was Milan's academy always famous for producing these kinds of defenders ? Or were they exceptions

 

[Reiver]

Was Milan's academy always famous for producing these kinds of defenders ? Or were they exceptions

I can't give much of an informed answer to that, sorry, I just dont know. I think they've certainly produced other very good defenders - Maldini's father also played for them for example.
I'd be very surprised if they ever produced a back line as good as they had from the late 80s into the mid 90s though. It was just that exceptional.

 

[Foxbatt]

How good is Milan Skriniar?

 

[Luke1995]

I can't give much of an informed answer to that, sorry, I just dont know. I think they've certainly produced other very good defenders - Maldini's father also played for them for example.
I'd be very surprised if they ever produced a back line as good as they had from the late 80s into the mid 90s though. It was just that exceptional.

Sure. Well, they seem to have the heir to Buffon in the national team though, in Donarrumma.