standards ?

[Askern_reds]

looking at old team sheets? just thinking how many of today's team would compare to the 70s and 80s teams? and to be honest I wouldn't put 1 of our team today in any, u just have to look at our team that got a 2-2draw at Liverpool , even the team that got beat 7-2 at Spurs? none come even close to these players, just shows how much are game as gone backwards, what price would Ellwis,brooks, chapel,kitchen,woods peacock, balderston? Too many fantastic players to mention, not just our team but how may fans from different clubs feel the same? Too much money killing the game

[BobG]

TIf you are suggesting playing those old players today in the state of fitness, training and knowledge that they had in the 70's and so on, they would be effing awful. Not one of them would get in any half way decent 3rd div side. If you mean bringing them up to modern day training etc, then yes. Some of them would be useful. As 'old' players though, they wouldn't last beyond the first half in a modern side. They would not be fit enough, they would not be quick enough, they would not be sharp enough in their vision, thinking and reactions. They'd be universally awful playing today to the level they played in their own time.

So, unlike you, I wouldn't even put Chris Balderstone in todays team - and he was a damn fine player.

You better speak to BST.

BobG

[IDM]

OK lets compare a few of our players in the last decade to those of the 70s and 80s.

Willie Boyd or Sullivan?
Windy Miller or Copps?
Alan Warboys or Chris Brown?
Billy Russell or Jimmy O?
Dave Cusack or Rob Jones?

There are many you could try and compare but a fairer analysis would be looking at how good our players in the 70s and 80s were against their peers in other teams in the same divisions (often struggling in Div 4, occasionally entertaining in the Bremner years).  Then compare the players of today against their peers - rising from the conference to the championship.  Many of our players in the last few years have been good enough for the championship - even if the club couldn't sustain that level.

[The Red Baron]

My take is that a great player would be great in any era, with one proviso. That is that he could reach the fitness standards of the time.

[Glyn_Wigley]

If they were that great, why were we stuck in the Fourth Division so much..?

[The Red Baron]

If they were that great, why were we stuck in the Fourth Division so much..?

I'm talking generally, Glyn. I would accept that over the last 7-8 years we have had players who have been of a higher standard than those we had in the 1970s or 80s.

[Askern_reds]

old 3rd div equivalent to what we're in now, and we never went out of league back then? I think the quality of players back then were better than today's,I'd pick Miller, peacock or Boyd,Irvine,warboys, all day long, you don't realy have to look that far back in time realy billy sharp 1 mill,cantona 1mill

[The Red Baron]

I think trying to compare transfer fees is even more fraught with difficultly than trying to compare the standard of players. The phrase "massive inflation" springs to mind.

[acko]

snodin brothers,rankin,watson,elwiss.ocallaghen,brevitt,all went on to higher things

[ravenrover]

As Jimmy Armfield said on Stanley Mathews 100th, never mind how would he play in todays game, how would the modern players perform in our day muddy pitches, heavy leather footballs, proper football boots and proper tackling (beer and fags - I just added these)

[BillyStubbsTears]

TRB

The difference is not just about physical fitness. It is much more fundamental than that.

Today's game is far, far faster than the game of forty years ago. So it certainly sets harder physical challenges. But it also requires players to think far more quickly and to translate that thinking into physical action far more quickly.

Players in the age of George Best and Pele had the luxury of both not having to run 10-12km every game and not having to make instant decisions constantly throughout the game. They had literal and metaphorical breathing space.

So I am far from convinced that the greats of previous ages would be great today if only try were fit enough. It would also depend on whether their brains were quick enough to compete with today's expectations. We'll never know, but I suspect that they wouldn't. Because if they HAD had that mental speed, they'd have displayed it AT SPEED in their own day. And they rarely did that. They exhibited their undoubted skill at a pace that by modern standards is very slow.

[The Red Baron]

BST

There is more to it than fitness and speed, physical and mental, though. Players like Best played on pitches that were usually heavier and sometimes resembled ploughed fields. Their playing implements - balls, boots- were less flexible and heavier. And a much greater level of physical contact was allowed.

We could reverse things. Put Lionel Messi into 1970s gear and turn him out at the Baseball Ground in mid-January against Ron Harris, Peter Storey or Hunter and Charlton. Now I think Messi is such a talent that he'd survive and eventually thrive. But he'd find it hard at first. The same could be said of a Pele transported into the modern game. And you know maybe playing with modern kit and not being kicked up in the air every few minutes he might soon catch on to the speed of foot and thought he'd need.

[i_ateallthepies]

I know BST you've offered that view several times before but for me the bottom line is they were at the top of the pyramid in their day, whatever peripheral factors either side of the argument wish to purvey.   The players of 40 years ago - given the same environment in which to develop from birth, the same training regimes employed today, the same incentives to perform to their maximum potential, they would still be at the top of the pyramid.

It is irrefutable, human evolution doesn't happen in 40 years to the degree you are suggesting, if at all.  The differences in performance between those players and today are entirely environmental.

[acko]

one of the biggest differences now is in the coaching,players these days have more of a specific role to play and natural talent goes out of the window with certain exceptions its more of a team game now.when we played it was more of go out show us what you can do but most of all enjoy it

[BillyStubbsTears]

Pies.

I've never said ANYTHING on this theme about evolution. Of COURSE it's all about the environment, the coaching, the expectations, the diet, the physical and mental preparation.

So of course I agree that players from 40 years ago would reach the heights that Zidane or Messi do today, given the same environment. No quibbles with that.

What I contest is whether it would have been the SAME players who were the best ones 40 years ago. We've no way of knowing, as there's no control experiment, but I suspect that the best ones in the 60s were the best ones in the environment of the 60s, but would not necessarily have been the best ones in a different environment.

[acko]

searching my memory bank the biggest change I can think of was probably alf ramseys world cup winning team,people like alan ball and nobby styles given specific jobs to do during the tournament,leaving a goal scorer like greaves out to play more of a team player,ramsey was probably the one that started this approach to football in this country,since then they real flair teams have failed with maybe argentina being the exception in there own back yard

[i_ateallthepies]

Pies.

I've never said ANYTHING on this theme about evolution. Of COURSE it's all about the environment, the coaching, the expectations, the diet, the physical and mental preparation.

So of course I agree that players from 40 years ago would reach the heights that Zidane or Messi do today, given the same environment. No quibbles with that.

What I contest is whether it would have been the SAME players who were the best ones 40 years ago. We've no way of knowing, as there's no control experiment, but I suspect that the best ones in the 60s were the best ones in the environment of the 60s, but would not necessarily have been the best ones in a different environment.

Billy, I wasn't saying that you did, but the posts you have made in the past on the subject have always been unequivocally saying that players the likes of George Best would not cut it against the players of today.