The Virgin League Draft - Physiocrat vs. harms (GROUP E)

[Invictus]

Physiocrat.......................................................................................................................................harms

..........VS...........

Team Physiocrat (M. Carrick dropped for E. Petit)

Tactics Overview


Tactics – Direct/ Mixed

Formation - Out of possession 4411, in possession it is somewhat fluid. This gives an idea of how it could look.

Spoiler: FORMATION IN POSSESSION

Defensive Line Balanced

Marking – Zonal

Schuster is at the heart of the side who can drop deep to play make and also burst forward. Ballon D’or winning Albert has a broadly free role to drift centrally and wide and to use his exceptional dribbling and scoring ability (79 goals in 76 games at his peak). Cuelemans’ role (Onze Bronze Winner in ‘81, behind Kaller and Breitner) is that of an attacking 8 and not a right-winger. He drifts to the right in the defensive phase to allow Albert to be further forward and a threat on the counter. In possession, Cuelemans will move centrally and link up with Albert and also go beyond him on occasions to utilise his shooting boots and his big head (37 in 94 games at his peak as a midfielder).

Crespo was the world's most expensive player in 2000 at the age of 25 after two exceptional years at Parma in the late 90s with some serious defensive talent still in Serie A (Nesta, Maldini etc.). He was a great all-round striker scoring goals with his left foot, right foot and head - 66 goals in 96 games at his peak. Zagallo takes his Brazil national side role as the hardworking left winger with an excellent cross on him to provide in the air for Cuelemans and Crespo, as well as lower crosses for Albert. Petit provides the bite at DM along with some tidy passing. The midfield four will be able to compress the space and provide good work rate to keep Netzer relatively quiet.

Zmuda marshals the defence with his excellent organising and game reading ability. He was probably Poland’s best ever CB appearing in 4 World Cups and is joint third on the all-time World Cup appearances. Partnering him is the uncompromising Santamaria, known as The Wall, who held the fort in the incredibly attacking Real side of the 50s and was regarded as one of the best CBs of his time. He will provide an excellent complement to Zmuda. Crazy Horse Hughes will play as a balanced left-back and Bessonov the attacking right back, utilising his stamina and crossing ability. Finally, I have the greatest Belgian keeper of all-time Jean-Marie Pfaff and winner of the IFFHS’s Best Goalkeeper in 1987.



Team harms (D. Carvajal dropped for A. Cuccureddu)

This team is built around Günter Netzer, whom I consider to be the best player in the whole draft, with an addition of a few standout players that don’t usually get the recognition they deserve – most notably, Miodrag Belodedici and Hans Krankl.

Up front we have a brilliant interchangeable front three – while all three players have their specific instructions, all of them are comfortable in multiple positions up front, which is very important in the type of the fast and direct football that I’m going to play here. Their pace, movement and finishing will allow me to utilise Netzer’s passing ability to the maximum level. The inspiration is Borussia Mönchengladbach of the early 70’s & the all-conquering West German side of 1972 (with slight adjustments as there aren’t any players who can simply replicate Beckenbauer’s role). You all know Marco Reus and Igor Chislenko has made a fair amount of draft appearances lately – a hardworking right winger/forward he was equally good at assisting and scoring from the wing; he also had a fantastic record in big games and against big players, consistently performing against the likes of Giacinto Facchetti and Bobby Moore. Herbert Wimmer, one of Mönchengladbach’s biggest icons, joins Netzer in midfield – their partnership was legendary because of how well Wimmer, an outstanding player on his own, had complimented Netzer’s enigmatic playing style. To give you a sense of his stature as a Borussia legend, take a look at this statue in Mönchengladbach – it's their own version of the Holy Trinity: Günter Netzer, Herbert Wimmer and Berti Vogts. Paulo Sousa's career at the top level was basically finished at the mere age of 26 because of his knee injuries, but he had still managed to secure a place in history, taking a part in Lippi's Juventus renaissance in the 90's and winning 2 Champions Leagues in a row – for Juventus in 1996 and for Borussia Dortmund in 1997.

Hans Krankl. With 514 official goals (level with Di Stefano and more than Kocsis, Greaves & Nordahl) he stands as the most prolific goalscorer in this draft. It’s hard to say how higher he would’ve been rated if he was born in a different country – spending most of career in Austria certainly didn’t help to establish his world-wide reputation, but it has to be noted that he had been equally impressive at every stage that he had performed at, including World Cup and his short stint at Barcelona. His best form came in the late 70’s – he had scored 113 goals in 119 club games between 1976/77 and 1978/79, helping Barcelona on the way to their first major European trophy (UEFA doesn’t count Fairs Cup as one), winning European Golden Shoe, Pichichi and finishing 2nd in 1978 Ballon d’Or vote. He was equally impressive for the national team at the time – his goals against Spain & Sweden saw Austria advance to the second round of 1978 World Cup (finishing higher than Brazil in their group), and his legendary brace against West Germany had stopped the current world champions from reaching a second successive final. That game is still known in Austria as Das Wunder von Córdoba (The Miracle of Córdoba).

Miodrag Belodedici at the moment is probably the most underrated defender – in our drafts and in general. Only 25 players had ever played in and won a European Cup final for an eastern European team. Miodrag Belodedici is two of them. Our resident Belodedici expert goes as far as to say that he was robbed from a top-3 Ballon d’Or finish in 1991 – and it’s hard to argue with him, considering how important «The Deer» was to Crena Zvezda’s European Cup-winning campaign. The defense is completed with Ricardo Pavoni – legendary Uruguayan defender who had won Copa Libertadores 5 times (obviously, it's a record), Walter Samuel – an archetypical aggressive stopper with flawless resume and Antonello Cuccureddu, my personal favourite utility henchman and an integral player in Juve's Scirea-Gentile-Cabrini-Cuccureddu backline of late 70's that had an insane clean sheet record, 78 clean sheets in 150 games, or 0,52 clean sheets per game. Harald Schumacher takes his place in the goal – he is often remembered only for the infamous Battiston accident, but Schumacher was an outstanding keeper – probably the best West German keeper ever outside of the obvious top-three (Kahn, Maier & Neuer).



Good luck @Physiocrat @harms!

 

[harms]

I’m actually finally making a proper video on Chislenko, but it won’t be finished in time – but there’s a chance that I’ll finish one or two games of his this evening.

Very good team @Physiocrat, it’s well-drafted and doesn’t have any obvious weaknesses. I guess it’ll come to how people rate our players individually. I can’t be happier with this set up for Netzer & I hope that Belodedici will get some proper credit throughout this draft.

 

[Physiocrat]

@harms Can you elaborate on Pavoni's and Cuccureddu's roles please?

Also it does seem odd that the left footed CB is at RCB. I never remember him at RCB.

On Krankl, it is true he has an exceptional career goalscoring record but I do think it a bit misleading when we tend to focus on three year peaks. Now that said his three year peak as you pointed out is close to 1 goal a game but Albert's record is more than 1 goal a game and includes the year he won the Ballon d'Or. Now determining the quality of the Hungarian league then is quite difficult.

Crespo on the other hand faced better CBs in Serie A and come out on top. This is not to denigrate Krankl, far from it, but to contextualize it.

 

[Himannv]

Is it Cuccureddu or Carvajal playing? The note indicates Cuccureddu was dropped?

 

[Physiocrat]

Clearly harms too has a well drafted team with no obvious weaknesses too.

I think I have slight advantage in goal scoring with Crespo, Albert and Cuelemans being genuine goal threats whereas harms is mainly Krankl and Reus.

My biggest threat is Albert on the counter released by Schuster. In a free role to exploit his pace and dribbling could cause chaos.

 

[Physiocrat]

Another area I think I have a marginal advantage is in set pieces. Both Crespo and Cuelemans were excellent in the air and will get great service from Schuster. I expect also that Albert will draw a fair few fouls so will have a number of opportunities to whip it in

Krankl was decent in the air but seems to me to be more of a dribble and poacher. I don't remember Samuel being a big threat from set-pieces. Can't comment on Belo as an attacking threat in the air

 

[harms]

I think I have slight advantage in goal scoring with Crespo, Albert and Cuelemans being genuine goal threats whereas harms is mainly Krankl and Reus.

That's just not true. Chislenko had scored 10 goals in 13 international games in 1967, more than any other European footballer, including F. Albert, who had won Ballon d'Or that year. He was not always positioned as a forward for the national team – his role alternated between a right winger in 4-4-2 and a wide forward, but here he's playing as a forward, which is a position where he had been very productive.

And where's Netzer? How come a player that had scored 108 goals in 297 games for Borussia is suddenly not a threat?

On Krankl, it is true he has an exceptional career goalscoring record but I do think it a bit misleading when we tend to focus on three year peaks. Now that said his three year peak as you pointed out is close to 1 goal a game but Albert's record is more than 1 goal a game and includes the year he won the Ballon d'Or. Now determining the quality of the Hungarian league then is quite difficult.

I don't need to focus on three year peaks. I can focus on his record for Barcelona in 1978/79, where he had scored 29 goals in 30 games in La Liga, 1 in 1 in the cup and 5 in 9 in Europe, all on the back of scoring 4 goals in 6 games of the 1978 World Cup. Or on his career record:

Krankl had scored everywhere he went. There are flat-track bullies and players with inflated stats – but Krankl had proved himself on every possible level.

 

[harms]

Is it Cuccureddu or Carvajal playing? The note indicates Cuccureddu was dropped?

Feel free to correct me but I thought that if A is dropped for B it means that B is playing.

Also it does seem odd that the left footed CB is at RCB. I never remember him at RCB.

I don't think that Samuel had any issues with playing on either side and I remember him playing on the right side quite often. I think the burden of evidence is on you on this one, but you can see that he is appearing on the right side at least as much as he does on the left one in the first video that I had googled:

 

[Gio]

Also it does seem odd that the left footed CB is at RCB. I never remember him at RCB.

What about your two CMs?

Actually make sense for Petit to sit behind the surging Cuelemans and the tactically aware Zagallo to be mindful of Schuster's movement.

 

[harms]

@harms Can you elaborate on Pavoni's and Cuccureddu's roles please?

What do you want to know exactly? Their roles are pretty standard for a modern 4-2-3-1. Balanced fullbacks with an option of overlap – Pavoni would do that more often that Cuccureddu, I'd imagine, his left peg was brilliant and on the right Chislenko gives more natural width. Especially since Ceulemans is often going to be cutting inside.

A good example of Pavoni's game:

 

[harms]

If we're talking about potential breaking points, I'd say that Netzer's runs from deep are most likely to cause a goalscoring chance on either side of the pitch. Schuster had a decent workrate, but he won't be able to stop Netzer – and Petit is, for me, the weakest midfielder on the pitch that is also not good enough to stop peak Netzer.

There should be quite a few of those runs here. It was a beauty of Netzer – you couldn't stop him. His runs created havoc which he had exploited – either by going further forward and scoring, or by making a pass to one of the forwards after a couple defenders rushed to stop him. And, unlike most of number 10s, he was built like a fecking tank, so when he had gained full speed, it was very hard to do something about him.

Re: Chislenko's goalscoring potency. I will make a video at some point, but let's give you an example – here's Chislenko scoring a brace against Moore & Banks at Wembley (nominally he was still a right winger in that game, but you can see how dangerous he was all over the pitch).

Ghosting Facchetti to score a screamer from the right wing:

Another World Cup classic – a Hamrin-esque goal against Colombia

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Fecking hell, harms is video bombing us. Will watch the Chislenko stuff as I am not at all educated on him.

 

[Himannv]

Feel free to correct me but I thought that if A is dropped for B it means that B is playing.

Could have sworn it read the opposite. Anyway, that's clear now. Now leave me alone while I sit and watch all your videos.

 

[Physiocrat]

That's just not true. Chislenko had scored 10 goals in 13 international games in 1967, more than any other European footballer, including F. Albert, who had won Ballon d'Or that year. He was not always positioned as a forward for the national team – his role alternated between a right winger in 4-4-2 and a wide forward, but here he's playing as a forward, which is a position where he had been very productive.

And where's Netzer? How come a player that had scored 108 goals in 297 games for Borussia is suddenly not a threat?


I don't need to focus on three year peaks. I can focus on his record for Barcelona in 1978/79, where he had scored 29 goals in 30 games in La Liga, 1 in 1 in the cup and 5 in 9 in Europe, all on the back of scoring 4 goals in 6 games of the 1978 World Cup. Or on his career record:

Krankl had scored everywhere he went. There are flat-track bullies and players with inflated stats – but Krankl had proved himself on every possible level.

I was referring to Chislenko's overall club career. I don't have season breakdowns but it was 68 in 229 games. Now he might have had a great consecutive three year peak in scoring but looking at the figures it seems unlikely. He had one great international goalscoring season but not one which had a major tournament. Also those 10 goals in one year account for half of Chislenko's total number of goals in his career for the USSR.

The odd thing about Albert is that his earlier international scoring record is much better than his Ballon d'Or winning seasons, my guess is that he played deeper then. In 1962 (where he was joint top scorer in the World Cup) he scored 5 in 9 games, in 1963 he scored 4 in 9 and then in 1965 6 in 6.

Netzer's record is good but Cuelemans is a bit better taking 3 year peaks (on a career level Cuelemans is much better at 191 in 401 games). Taking 1970/71 to 1972/73 which is when he was runner-up in the Ballon d'Or, won the Euros and was the Bundesliga best player for two consecutive years he scored 31 goals in 89 games which averages 13 goals a season in a 38 game season assuming he played all games compared to Cuelemans 37 in 94 leading to a 15 goals in a 38 game season. My point was slightly misleading discounting Netzer but it is still the case the Cuelemans provides more of a threat.

My point on Krankl was not that he was a flat track bully, I merely was making the point that he is not far and away the best goalscorer on the pitch. I get annoyed in general when people make career goal record arguments when we are working with a three year peak hence my objection. Anyway this seems an appropriate time for a Crespo video - note how he scores with his left foot, right foot and his head. He was the all-round package.

 

[Physiocrat]

What about your two CMs?

Actually make sense for Petit to sit behind the surging Cuelemans and the tactically aware Zagallo to be mindful of Schuster's movement.

Nice white text

My main point on Samuel was that I most remember him as the LCB in Roma's 3-5-2 and alongside Lucio again as LCB for Inter. Also there tend to be very few left-footed CBs and I always remember them on the left side. It isn't a major issue, just wondered why it wasn't the other way around.

 

[Physiocrat]

What do you want to know exactly? Their roles are pretty standard for a modern 4-2-3-1. Balanced fullbacks with an option of overlap – Pavoni would do that more often that Cuccureddu, I'd imagine, his left peg was brilliant and on the right Chislenko gives more natural width. Especially since Ceulemans is often going to be cutting inside.

A good example of Pavoni's game:

Just what I was looking for. Will have a watch later.

 

[Physiocrat]

If we're talking about potential breaking points, I'd say that Netzer's runs from deep are most likely to cause a goalscoring chance on either side of the pitch. Schuster had a decent workrate, but he won't be able to stop Netzer – and Petit is, for me, the weakest midfielder on the pitch that is also not good enough to stop peak Netzer.

Petit was a perfectly good DM who won the Onze Bronze in 1998. Plus it is a collective effort in midfield with Zagallo and Cuelemans providing tactical nous, work rate and cover. All my point is about Albert is that when he is released by Schuster is will already where he can hurt you whereas Netzer will be deeper. Nothing wrong with that, just a different way of playing. I just think that Albert is in a position to cause more problems on the counter here.

And for those who don't know Albert to well, see this against Brazil in 66. It is one of the best all-touch compilations I have ever seen.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Not that easy to call but looking at physio's defense (including GK) as an entity, it looks definitely better that the harms'. So physio wins my vote.

Not sure if harms was creating a team with a fun theme here, but during drafting, I felt he wasn't picking the best available players.

 

[harms]

I was referring to Chislenko's overall club career. I don't have season breakdowns but it was 68 in 229 games. Now he might have had a great consecutive three year peak in scoring but looking at the figures it seems unlikely. He had one great international goalscoring season but not one which had a major tournament. Also those 10 goals in one year account for half of Chislenko's total number of goals in his career for the USSR.

Well, he has 2 goals in 4 games of 1966 World Cup (a tournament, where Florian Albert had actually failed to score ; this fact had surprised me, as he had a great tournament) and 2 goals in 3 games of 1962 World Cup. It's not that shabby, I'd say.

He has played all of the 50's and the first half of the 60's as a right winger in 5 and 4-men attacks; the tactical evolution had only allowed him a role with more freedom in the mid 60's, which he had embraced. So yeah, he had a great three-year peak where his goalscoring went on a completely another level. This is a criticism based on ignorance and not a criticism based on facts ("he might have.. it seems unlikely").

Netzer's record is good but Cuelemans is a bit better taking 3 year peaks (on a career level Cuelemans is much better at 191 in 401 games). Taking 1970/71 to 1972/73 which is when he was runner-up in the Ballon d'Or, won the Euros and was the Bundesliga best player for two consecutive years he scored 31 goals in 89 games which averages 13 goals a season in a 38 game season assuming he played all games compared to Cuelemans 37 in 94 leading to a 15 goals in a 38 game season. My point was slightly misleading discounting Netzer but it is still the case the Cuelemans provides more of a threat.

You had literally said that I have only 2 "main" goalscorers in Krankl and Reus and then listed Crespo, Albert and Ceulemans as your prominent goalscorers. Your point was not "slightly misleading" when you've simply ignored Netzer, who had matched Ceulemans in terms of goals at the peak. In a better league as well.

 

[harms]

I'm getting riled up so easily, I'm probably going to need to take a break after this one.

 

[Physiocrat]

Well, he has 2 goals in 4 games of 1966 World Cup (a tournament, where Florian Albert had actually failed to score ; this fact had surprised me, as he had a great tournament) and 2 goals in 3 games of 1962 World Cup. It's not that shabby, I'd say.

He has played all of the 50's and the first half of the 60's as a right winger in 5 and 4-men attacks; the tactical evolution had only allowed him a role with more freedom in the mid 60's, which he had embraced. So yeah, he had a great three-year peak where his goalscoring went on a completely another level. This is a criticism based on ignorance and not a criticism based on facts ("he might have.. it seems unlikely").

That is a better record than I expected although focusing on purely international performances is not the normal way of assessing goal scoring prowess (the obvious example of someone with great international record and relatively poor domestic performances here is Klose) but yes he has a very good international record for three years. With respect to my ignorance, yes it was based on ignorance but I can't find season breakdowns of his domestic scoring records. I also didn't know the international breakdown. In my defence, I suspect few know this and I was working on the info I had from Wikipedia - I had a look on footballdatabase.eu and came up with nothing.

 

[Fortitude]

I'm getting riled up so easily, I'm probably going to need to take a break after this one.

T'was me on Saturday, that!

 

[Theon]

@Physiocrat what’s the plan for dealing with Netzer here?

Also can you give a bit more information on Ceulemans’ role in possession and how you see that working with Albert?

 

[Physiocrat]

@Physiocrat what’s the plan for dealing with Netzer here?

Also can you give a bit more information on Ceulemans’ role in possession and how you see that working with Albert?

In the organised defensive phase it's about a compact midfield four and back four closing the space to minimise the space he will work in. In defensive transition phase there will be some counter-pressing to stop a quick long pass from Netzer. Then we get back into the organised defensive position as quickly as possible.

As for Ceulemans -

This is a possible formation in possession. Ceulemans does one of two things, moves into the 10 position as Albert becomes a CF/RF or Cuelemans goes beyond him into the SS/CF position to open up space for Albert to drop into the 10 position to either make a pass or run from deeper. This way I can make use of Cuelemans heading ability from crosses from Zagallo or Bessonov. The position of Cuelemans will be dictated mostly by Albert. The idea is to interchange to get the best out of the attributes of both. Clearly the responsibility for width in attack is mostly on Bessonov but Albert can and will drift as he pleases - he pops up right a few times in the video I posted above IIRC

 

[Jim Beam]

I'm getting riled up so easily, I'm probably going to need to take a break after this one.

the part which annoys me the most as far as drafts are concerned.

Two very good teams. @Physiocrat you do love to stuck a midfielder on a wing in a 4-4-2 (last time it was Masopust). From what I know about Jan, he does have some experience on the wing, but it is from the left one. Can you say more about your reasons for putting him there? Mostly prefer a classic wide man in a 4-4-2 tbh unless it is based on some actual tactics like himannv did with Litmanen in his game. You also can't use his record considering he played a different role while putting those numbers. Anyway, just wanted to hear more thoughts about it.

Edit: ok, that response to theon basically covers most of my question. Have to think about it more.

 

[Physiocrat]

the part which annoys me the most as far as drafts are concerned.

Two very good teams. @Physiocrat you do love to stuck a midfielder on a wing in a 4-4-2 (last time it was Masopust). From what I know about Jan, he does have some experience on the wing, but it is from the left one. Can you say more about your reasons for putting him there? Mostly prefer a classic wide man in a 4-4-2 tbh unless it is based on some actual tactics like himannv did with Litmanen in his game. You also can't use his record considering he played a different role while putting those numbers. Anyway, just wanted to hear more thoughts about it.

Edit: ok, that response to theon basically covers most of my question

I think Masopust on the left was due to the odd reinforcements we had when Scrappy was running a draft, I still think it works though. Here's the thinking for this side -

I want it to get the best out of Schuster. He was a box-to-box midfield playmaker and many times collects the ball from the CBs. So I don't want to play him as the furthest forward midfielder (assuming a midfield three), I want him next to an anchor, Petit in this case, to do his thing and have lots of options further forward. So the best type of player ahead of him is an attacking 8 with good work rate and good goalscoring record (multiple scorers is a plus) to provide defensive stability and not to get on Schuster's toes. Then I could either have two wing forwards but that means two attacking full-backs which limits the expansiveness of the midfield and doesn't suit a proper 9 which I always like as it gives a focal point up front and an aerial strategy too. So I need a tactically accomplished winger in Zagallo, one attacking full-back (Bessonov) and then the serious spark up front which in this pool was clearly Albert. So in the attacking phase it could look like this (to use the pitch well I want players who can work the five channels in the final third -

The question now is how to defend. One option is a 433 with Albert wide right and Zagallo left with Schuster LCM, Cuelemans RCM and Petit DM. The issue here is it wastes some of Zagallo's defensive ability and Albert is stuck wide and may have to drop deeper than I would like depending on which side is attacked (I want him free for a counter). Further, in the defensive phase a 4411 (it isn't really a 442) I think compresses the space and reduces options better than a 433. So Cuelemans makes the most sense to move to the RM position in the defensive phase - he is not though a right winger. In possession, he drifts inside and so him being left footed is actually a benefit in this case - the formation is not narrow as Bessonov provides the width on the right and overlaps Cuelemans and/or Albert. Also midfielders out wide in the defensive phase isn't unusual - Scholes played LM in the Veron era a number of times as Giggs played behind RVN. So I do think Cueleman's numbers are fair to use in this case (I omitted the records which I was pretty sure he played as an SS). I hope that makes sense

 

[Physiocrat]

@harms Just seen the Pavoni vid. He seems a quality player. Gets forward well, his long passing is pretty good and has a strong shot . He is also never beaten at LB in that game.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

What do you want to know exactly? Their roles are pretty standard for a modern 4-2-3-1. Balanced fullbacks with an option of overlap – Pavoni would do that more often that Cuccureddu, I'd imagine, his left peg was brilliant and on the right Chislenko gives more natural width. Especially since Ceulemans is often going to be cutting inside.

A good example of Pavoni's game:

Jesus . Is that a recent video? Picked him in the Americas Draft and fell in love with him largely on the strength of 1) his moustache and 2) his reputation, but the available full matches were really, really unpromising and I just dropped researching him properly. Somehow he looks exactly how I imagined him there though - tough as teak defensively and a good, enterprising player in the attacking phase.

Don't see any massive tactical or individual match up discrepancies but was edging towards Physio due to rating Petit higher than most and my (possibly short-term) thinking that Schuster was better than Netzer. Pavoni vid has stymied me in terms in making any decision at all, which probably demonstrates how little we really know about all these players and why some people hate this draft forum culuture so much

 

[Fortitude]

Jesus . Is that a recent video? Picked him in the Americas Draft and fell in love with him largely on the strength of 1) his moustache and 2) his reputation, but the available full matches were really, really unpromising and I just dropped researching him properly. Somehow he looks exactly how I imagined him there though - tough as teak defensively and a good, enterprising player in the attacking phase.

Don't see any massive tactical or individual match up discrepancies but was edging towards Physio due to rating Petit higher than most and my (possibly short-term) thinking that Schuster was better than Netzer. Pavoni vid has stymied me in terms in making any decision at all, which probably demonstrates how little we really know about all these players and why some people hate this draft forum culuture so much

Whoa there, cowboy! Never seen that line of thought before; is it a shared view round these parts?

There was a reason why harms took Netzer as a top-end first round pick despite having basically a veritable smorgasbord of the cream of the crop to choose from.

Schuster should always get his props, but Netzer is seen as a genius, to both the positive and negative with regards to talent verses ego/personality. Netzer is perhaps having a World Cup as good as his Euros from being in the Platini/Zico tier as most discussions used to go. Not sure the same can be said of Schuster by any metric, as good as he was.

I suppose a curiosity for me round these parts is having no real clue of the established order and regard players outside the set few sit in their respective positional lexicons, have. Other places, some guys barely rated here are basically gods, so the contrasts do take some getting used to!

---

@Physiocrat like your extensive posts explaining your vision and concept.

 

[Physiocrat]

Jesus . Is that a recent video? Picked him in the Americas Draft and fell in love with him largely on the strength of 1) his moustache and 2) his reputation, but the available full matches were really, really unpromising and I just dropped researching him properly. Somehow he looks exactly how I imagined him there though - tough as teak defensively and a good, enterprising player in the attacking phase.

I remember watching a few videos of Amancio Amaro a while back and thought, this guy is trash how on earth could he be so highly rated? More recently though there have other videos which make him look a lot better and chime well with the written reports about him. I think my line of thinking now is if the written reports are good and I see at least one good video of an older player he was probably good

 

[Himannv]

@harms Got any videos of Krankl?

 

[harms]

Whoa there, cowboy! Never seen that line of thought before; is it a shared view round these parts?

There was a reason why harms took Netzer as a top-end first round pick despite having basically a veritable smorgasbord of the cream of the crop to choose from.

Schuster should always get his props, but Netzer is seen as a genius, to both the positive and negative with regards to talent verses ego/personality. Netzer is perhaps having a World Cup as good as his Euros from being in the Platini/Zico tier as most discussions used to go. Not sure the same can be said of Schuster by any metric, as good as he was.

I’d say that young Schuster had the potential to match Netzer, but injuries (and, perhaps, his character) stopped him. Netzer went toe to toe with Beckenbauer & Müller’s Bayern in the league, often outperforming them and then continued with this in Spain, winning to La Ligas and 2 Cups against Cruyff & Neeskens’ Barca. They both have 1 amazing international tournament (1972 & 1980), but I’d put Netzer slightly ahead there as well.

 

[harms]

@harms Got any videos of Krankl?

All touch compilation against West Germany in 1978 WC. It's quite an average Austrian side with only Prohaska being worthy of note – you can see how much more time Krankl spends in the build-up because of that. And still manages to score a legendary brace against the reigning World champions, eliminating them from the tournament:

Barbosa's video of his best goals:

CWC Final in 1979 (not mine, so it's not really an all-touch compilation, but it covers a lot)

An obligatory music video (you've asked for videos!):

 

[Himannv]

Cheers for the videos, @harms

I like seeing players and systems that we don't see often. That's been the best part of this draft so far.

 

[harms]

Not that easy to call but looking at physio's defense (including GK) as an entity, it looks definitely better that the harms'. So physio wins my vote.

Not sure if harms was creating a team with a fun theme here, but during drafting, I felt he wasn't picking the best available players.

Missed that. I'd genuinely only take Bessonov and Schuster from his team, and Schuster actually doesn't really fit my tactics. Probably Santamaria over Samuel if I were to try and to be objective in my drafting, but I'm not a big fan of the former. It's also a coin-toss between the keepers, but I'll understand those who'd go for Pfaff.

So yeah, we're probably very different in our assessment of a lot of players and that difference only get bigger when we go deeper into an underrated pool. I'm very happy with my team and I've picked a lot of underrated players that I think are not getting enough credit – and that seems to be true, judging by your comment

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

I've picked a lot of underrated players that I think are not getting enough credit – and that seems to be true, judging by your comment

Yea, that does seem to be the case.

I would never have picked someone like Chislenko due to ignorance but seems to be a really good player from the footage you have presented. Bit less but probably we will see more once you are done with your compilation.

 

[Physiocrat]

Good game @harms

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

A bit late. Was leaning towards harms team a bit. Don't really buy Ceulemans in this role esp with Albert. Feel both tend to drift into same areas.

 

[Physiocrat]

A bit late. Was leaning towards harms team a bit. Don't really buy Ceulemans in this role esp with Albert. Feel both tend to drift into same areas.

Cuelemans was an 8 and Albert an AM/SS they will both tend centrally but one Albert will on average be further forward. Also having both being able to interchange is a plus in my book especially Cuelemans moving ahead of Albert gives the latter more passing options and makes it more difficult for the defenders to know what's coming.

If I had a proper 10 at RM there I could potentially see the problem but not in this case. Also if you watch the video I posted Albert floats all across the front line anyway.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Cuelemans was an 8

That's interesting. I've always thought of Ceulemans as a #10 / #9.5. Have picked him once before in old draft and somehow that impression still stuck with me.