Personally I think he is a midfielder at best a 9.5 if you stretch it.
The Double Draft
- Thread starter Edgar Allan Pillow
- Start date
He has to be in , and only cal left to pick a midfielder .
Van Moer is too good I guess? I'd argue that he is not - in his peak he played as an attacking midfielder and he's competing there with Maradonas and Platinis of this world - and while he was a beast in 1980 Euros it was his swan song and his actual playing level was much lower, like it sometime happens at short international tournaments. So you'd have a dilemma - you either pick a better player and play him in a position that has probably the deepest pool of goats, or you pick an off peak 35-year old (or how old was he, don't remember without google) in a less demanding position. I guess I sold him too good in the Euro draftHere you go: I've highlighted players who I don't think fit the spirit of the criteria or have much better prospects out there.
Can you please make new nominations?
@mazhar13 @harms @RedTiger @Marty1968 @DavidG
I'm going to think of his replacement soon but maybe you'll change your mind about him? Don't think that Camoranesi or Solskjaer were significantly worse players.
I agree, but drafts being judged by peak performances means only Eur'80 performances will be highlighted. Difficult to argue against mediocrity there. He was definitely above Camoranesi or Solskjaer considering peak.
What about 3-year peak?
So Salvatore Schillaci won't do either? I just want to give managers something to argue about - not that their legacy players were a definition of mediocrity but that they had their ups and downs and some memorable moments or tournaments too.
Get back at me if Schillaci is alright while I'm going to think further
I know perfectly well that Butragueño is in the legacy pool, since I nominated him there:
What I'm saying is that the DoF pool needs to be fixed, and made more uniform in terms of quality - failing which maybe we should be given the option to tailor our picks in tune with some of the nominations being forwarded, seemingly in 'good faith'. There's a reason why one DoF nomination was picked in R1 of the all-time pool, and the other lasted till the 9th (hence the reason why the defender pool isn't perfectly fine):
And the attacker lasted till Round 7 in that selection, and 8th from a previous all-time draft:
I can assure you that Domingos/Blokhin aren't the first names that come to the average manager's mind while drawing up a GOAT-ish list.
Ah, feck it, who cares. Time to get off the soap-box:
Legacy - Thiago Motta (Butragueño)
Legacy - Thiago Motta (
Kleberson @Edgar Allan Pillow ? World cup, copa america and a few league titles?
Malouda? Tell me to stop when someone will fit the criteria
Malouda? Tell me to stop when someone will fit the criteria
Couple of obvious suggestions:
Lose Charles and get someone who shares the first five letters of his name in.
We all love Scholes, but there are multiple choices available who's a notch above. Not least when we factor in that Scholes is either an attacking midfielder/second striker (young), injury prone central midfielder (mid) or a deep lying playmaker with questionable legs (old).
From the central midfielder pool alone, there's one obvious Spaniard and one obvious Czech(oslovakian) player who can replace him to good effect.
Lose Charles and get someone who shares the first five letters of his name in.
We all love Scholes, but there are multiple choices available who's a notch above. Not least when we factor in that Scholes is either an attacking midfielder/second striker (young), injury prone central midfielder (mid) or a deep lying playmaker with questionable legs (old).
From the central midfielder pool alone, there's one obvious Spaniard and one obvious Czech(oslovakian) player who can replace him to good effect.
Maradona as a midfielder, Eusebio as my CF
legacy pick Owen Hargreaves?
Ze Roberto then for legacy pick.
@Edgar Allan Pillow
@Edgar Allan Pillow
@Cal? just waiting for your picks....
Defenders:
There is one obvious giant who is missing here, considered the greatest marker of all time by many - and a clear upgrade on Cannavaro, I'd say.
Depending on how highly one rates Rio, or Nesta for that matter, one could consider a certain Peruvian for the part. For instance. There are others too.
Other than that, I think the rest are pretty much unquestionable in the sense that you can't speak of obvious upgrades being available.
There is one obvious giant who is missing here, considered the greatest marker of all time by many - and a clear upgrade on Cannavaro, I'd say.
Depending on how highly one rates Rio, or Nesta for that matter, one could consider a certain Peruvian for the part. For instance. There are others too.
Other than that, I think the rest are pretty much unquestionable in the sense that you can't speak of obvious upgrades being available.
Or even a certain Uruguayan.
Yep - him too.
In my opinion, once you have taken care of the obvious ones e.g. Ibra I think the rest are fine. There is a risk of trying to normalize it too much, which probably takes out the random luck part. I mean it would kinda suck getting Scholes when the other get Didi, but would it be really that bad? The other manager (your DOFI) clearly rate Scholes / Ferdinand / Henry as a GOAT. He/she might be wrong, but them are the hands dealt, and it would be fun to try to overcome your "bad luck". In last reality draft Anto was given Gerrard in DOFI pool, and he still managed to win the whole thing (granted he got lucky with Tevezbola round but still).
Just my 2 cents.
Just my 2 cents.
Malouda is fine but Michel Bastos wasn't ?!
Well, I'm not the ruler but I'm inclined to think there isn't a big difference between them.
Humm. Both played for Lyon at their prime and had the chance to participate in the WC.
Let's say Malouda has probably made 4-5 excellent seasons in his career against 2 for Bastos (1 with Lille and 1 with Lyon).
No, it wouldn't be that bad, I suppose. You could work your way around it.
However, the point, as I see it, remains that as far as I can see the DoFs aren't supposed to include possible curve balls - they're just supposed to be unquestionably great players of the sort you can't easily improve on. You can easily improve on Scholes, though, in my opinion.
So, he'd stand out as a curve ball of sorts in a group with no other curve balls.
Brazilians posters would be shocked by some missings.
Otherwise, some French/German defenders could have been part of this story.
Otherwise, some French/German defenders could have been part of this story.
Probably it's because of me not rating French Leagues that highly. Malouda's Chelsea stint makes him slightly better and more commonly known imo.
Don't think it's peak quality as much as name recognition. Bastos is more obscure to the average voter. Given that these legacy boys have a sheep-ish function without actually being sheep, they should be recognizable by the average neutral/voter.
Well, that's a possible reason, at least. I agree that it's no huge gap between them quality wise.
Not curveballs no, just different managers rating players differently. I can totally see someone making a point of Scholes being an all time top 16 midfielder. I won't agree with it, but won't find it particularly outraging as well. FWIW in a normal snake I can see Scholes being picked up before the said Uruguyan or Czech midfielder.
That might happen, no doubt. But I'd argue that this is because Scholes is very popular round here - and because many still treat him as a synthesis of his three phases (which is unreasonable not to say preposterous) rather than as A, B or C.
You won't find any non-United affiliated posters on here who rates Scholes above either of the two players mentioned (both of whom are Ballon winners).
But, yes - I see where you're coming from. If Scholes is genuinely that highly rated (overrated, as some would say), then - well, it is what it is.
I'm with @Chesterlestreet on this. It should be universally respected greats, one's who represent the epitome of footballing excellence in their position and proven at every kind of level. Scholes falls short here, as did Zlatan.
I think on here Scholes could go earlier and in that sense is a viable enough pick. Then again he is the softest of the midfielders and the only one without the proven track record of dominating at the highest cross-generational level.
Thanks for the invite @Edgar Allan Pillow by the way. Need to recharge my draft batteries but looking forward to bitching from the sidelines. The last reality draft was great entertainment.
The thing is that if the DoF factor were supposed to reflect reality, then the GOAT aspect of it should be scrapped altogether: The reality is that a manager may get screwed over by a foolish DoF – who throws sub-par players at him whom he simply has to work with and get the best out of. That could've been an implemented factor in the draft – but as it stands, it is not: The DoFs are supposed to be GOATs, they're not supposed to be random players you get stuck with (players who can be anything from great to mediocre).
And given this, it seems reasonable to expect that they – the DoF players – are unquestionable, players the majority of drafters and neutrals actually consider Top 16 in their categories.
Enough said about it, though – we'll just see how it all plays out.
And given this, it seems reasonable to expect that they – the DoF players – are unquestionable, players the majority of drafters and neutrals actually consider Top 16 in their categories.
Enough said about it, though – we'll just see how it all plays out.
What was wrong with John Charles? If he didn't get through how did Baggio
If you want to join the management team, welcome. It'll be good to have you to add spice to the draft.
I don't think most would consider Charles a Top 16 forward in an all-time setting, it's not more complicated than that.
Is Baggio Top 16? Possibly, possibly not - there are many "forwards" (including wingers and whatnot) who could have made the cut. But I think what those have in common is that they're not sheer strikers/centre forwards/finishers. Charles is limited in the sense that you probably need to stick him up front as a fairly straight-arse #9. You have to be pretty damn good as a straight-arse #9 in order to be considered among the Top 16 in football history among sundry forward types.
If there had been a "miscellaneous" category here, you could make a case for Charles: A unique player who deserves his place in football history, no questions asked. But - again - he simply isn't among the very greatest considered as a forward, in isolation.
Fair points, but John Charles did get voted Serie A’s greatest foreign player in 1997
Van Moer is too good I guess? I'd argue that he is not - in his peak he played as an attacking midfielder and he's competing there with Maradonas and Platinis of this world - and while he was a beast in 1980 Euros it was his swan song and his actual playing level was much lower, like it sometime happens at short international tournaments. So you'd have a dilemma - you either pick a better player and play him in a position that has probably the deepest pool of goats, or you pick an off peak 35-year old (or how old was he, don't remember without google) in a less demanding position. I guess I sold him too good in the Euro draft
I'm going to think of his replacement soon but maybe you'll change your mind about him? Don't think that Camoranesi or Solskjaer were significantly worse players.
Tbf he did win 3 Belgian Golden Shoes and he did seem like an excellent player in the 1970 WC and he also has the 1980 Euros exploits under his bag. Definitely too good for the legacy category but won't exactly get picked in an all-time draft either.
Btw did you quote me and delete a post? Got a tag but can't see it.
Yeah echo this too for what it's worth. @Edgar Allan PillowI know perfectly well that Butragueño is in the legacy pool, since I nominated him there:
What I'm saying is that the DoF pool needs to be fixed, and made more uniform in terms of quality - failing which maybe we should be given the option to tailor our picks in tune with some of the nominations being forwarded, seemingly in 'good faith'. There's a reason why one DoF nomination was picked in R1 of the all-time pool, and the other lasted till the 9th (hence the reason why the defender pool isn't perfectly fine):
And the attacker lasted till Round 7 in that selection, and 8th from a previous all-time draft:
I can assure you that Domingos/Blokhin aren't the first names that come to the average manager's mind while drawing up a GOAT-ish list.
Malouda was great for Chelsea (especially with Anchelotti when they broke goalscoring record iirc, he was Chelsea's players player of the year), he was a starter for a French team that ended up runners-up in 2006 WC - Bastos doesn't come close to that in his achievements.
Ah, I understand you better now. I do agree that there are better picks than Domigos and Blokhin.
OK, lads. this is enough. Nominations are closed. I'll fix the lists and post up the final DoF pools shortly.
Where is @Cal?
Where is @Cal?
Like I said - his peak was clearly earlier, when he played as an attacking mid and won 3 Golden Shoes - but in this position he competes with the likes of Maradona, Platini and Ronaldinho. It's all about the competition for me - that's why Le Tissier is such a good legacy pick, Van moer was a better player than Breigel but Breigel's standing in all-time fullbacks list is certainly higher than Van Moer's in the list of attacking midfielders.
Yes, I wanted to answer you before that and quoted your post from the phone but got distracted and forgot about that - and when I posted the reply to Edgar, cafe's forum mechanics also included the draft of my message to you, which I deleted after I saw the comment posted.