Best era of footballers.

[Sam]

40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's or current.

I believe de 80's had the best era of footbllers in the world... that decade. De most amount of talent....

Wha is allyuh take....

PS: Only saw the early years on vidoe, maybe the older heads can tell us more from the 60's and so on....

[capodetutticapi]

every decade have ah cream of de crop but my personal best is de 80's.

[Andre]

2000s

footballers getting more skillful, faster, stronger by the day.

a big team from the 80s couldn't compete with a big team from today e.g. brazil 86 vs.brazil 06. i say brazil 06 go win.

[capodetutticapi]

2000s

footballers getting more skillful, faster, stronger by the day.

a big team from the 80s couldn't compete with a big team from today e.g. brazil 86 vs.brazil 06. i say brazil 06 go win.

imo 86 would crush 06.

[Filho]

2000s

footballers getting more skillful, faster, stronger by the day.

a big team from the 80s couldn't compete with a big team from today e.g. brazil 86 vs.brazil 06. i say brazil 06 go win.

imo 86 would crush 06.

i would agree with Andre. A team from 1986 just would probably have a real hard time playing at the pace and physicality of a current team, even of the players are technically and have better chemistry. the game has changed quite a bit from those days. if those fellas form 86 had the level of strength and stamina, of modern day professionals, then i could see it. plenty ifs...heheh. Brazil 86 is still my favorite Brazil team tho'

[Observer]

The thread is best era of football. Not who would beat whom. The various eras were not exposed to the science of today (medical, training etc), pitch quality, referee protection etc.
On a World stage I would say late 60's and 70's. This time period exposed football to some of
the true greats

[acb]

2000s

footballers getting more skillful, faster, stronger by the day.

a big team from the 80s couldn't compete with a big team from today e.g. brazil 86 vs.brazil 06. i say brazil 06 go win.

In addition to that, the amount of games and competitions that need to be played. Also, very underestimated in all eras is distances travelled to play games.

We hear so much about jet-lag and the impact that it has on players who need to readjust - but medicine and technology have done alot to bridge the gap and minimalize the effects. I don't know how players from earlier decades could navigate and cope with the amount of travel that modern players have to deal with.

[Filho]

The thread is best era of football. Not who would beat whom. The various eras were not exposed to the science of today (medical, training etc), pitch quality, referee protection etc.
On a World stage I would say late 60's and 70's. This time period exposed football to some of
the true greats

for some people..best era would include would be defined by who would beat whom. you can't dictate how people will interpret 'best era'. it is open to interpretation..just as you have your own interpretation

[Observer]

The thread is best era of football. Not who would beat whom. The various eras were not exposed to the science of today (medical, training etc), pitch quality, referee protection etc.
On a World stage I would say late 60's and 70's. This time period exposed football to some of
the true greats

for some people..best era would include would be defined by who would beat whom. you can't dictate how people will interpret 'best era'. it is open to interpretation..just as you have your own interpretation

Ok I understand! but they will never play, so we will never know.

People will also argue that a team today could not play back in 1969. Put ManU on a bumpy dry pitch in Sao Paulo versus Santos 1969 with a referee from 1969 and and and 

[Filho]

The thread is best era of football. Not who would beat whom. The various eras were not exposed to the science of today (medical, training etc), pitch quality, referee protection etc.
On a World stage I would say late 60's and 70's. This time period exposed football to some of
the true greats

for some people..best era would include would be defined by who would beat whom. you can't dictate how people will interpret 'best era'. it is open to interpretation..just as you have your own interpretation

Ok I understand! but they will never play, so we will never know.

People will also argue that a team today could not play back in 1969. Put ManU on a bumpy dry pitch in Sao Paulo versus Santos 1969 with a referee from 1969 and and and 

yeah..this topic is pure subectivity. But seriously, ManU destroying any side from 1969. 

[Deeks]

This is a very subjective topic. Each era tend to be different because the football structure changes. improvement in training techniques, better facilities, more money, more skillful players from overseas as pertain to the Euro leagues. Then there are some players who span more than one era(Latas and York).

Locally, I think that although the current players may be faster, probaly stronger and have more technique, I don't think they are more skilfull than the players of yesteryear.  As a spectator, 60, 70 were much better than this current era(in local football). 

[kicker]

Ole people will always say long time football(ers) was better...

[giggsy11]

80s and 90s. The World Cups were better, the quality of footballer was better. Shit Brazil was better-I believe that any Brazil team from those eras would wax today's team.

[acb]

This is a very subjective topic. Each era tend to be different because the football structure changes. improvement in training techniques, better facilities, more money, more skillful players from overseas as pertain to the Euro leagues. Then there are some players who span more than one era(Latas and York).

Locally, I think that although the current players may be faster, probaly stronger and have more technique, I don't think they are more skilfull than the players of yesteryear.  As a spectator, 60, 70 were much better than this current era(in local football). 

Quite true.

Which one is better? ....

Zidane in 1998 WC
Zidane in 2006 WC

[Deeks]

You put me in a tight spot. but I will say 98 because he won it all.

[Observer]

You put me in a tight spot. but I will say 98 because he won it all.

Actually deeks Zidane did not play well in 98. Was red carded and returned to have a good final.
In 06 he was brilliant, more consistent and then got the red card hahahahah

[WestCoast]

Right now baby....right now

Zidane in 2006 WC

By ah head

[Trini]

All u hadda do is look at the progression of the 100M world record from the early 20th century to present day.
Almost a whole 3/4 second faster now.

There is no way a team of the 80's would beat a team of the present day.
With the advance in technology of scouting the opposition, improvements in dietary considerations, improvements in training regimes and strength, plus the advantage of being able to watch and learn skill from older generations, there is no way a team from a generation ago will beat a team of the present day.
They might have more naturally talented players who were exciting to watch, but the defensive aspect of the game has progressed to the extent that skill alone will not win games.

Just my opinion on a very subjective topic.
All things equal, i much prefer to watch international games from the past, but club games of the present day.

[pardners]

This is another one of those threads that does change title and come again and again 
Just take it for what it is nah, different time, different era, different players, different rules, different conditions...

[kicker]

Actually deeks Zidane did not play well in 98. Was red carded and returned to have a good final.
In 06 he was brilliant, more consistent and then got the red card hahahahah

Always tell people that- glad someone remembered. 

WC 1998 MVP was Ronaldo.

[Marcos]

Fed up hear kicker and Filho mention that Zidane was sub par in WC98 or big up Brazil WC94 side

[Filho]

Fed up hear kicker and Filho mention that Zidane was sub par in WC98 or big up Brazil WC94 side

Zidane was subpar in Wc98. Like dat Brazil 94 squad 

[Observer]

This is another one of those threads that does change title and come again and again 
Just take it for what it is nah, different time, different era, different players, different rules, different conditions...

dat is what make it sweet  

Football today the teams are more balanced, fitter and organized. Yes I agree TEAM speed is a big factor , the ability of teams to go from attack to defense etc. However, just judging things like speed is not relevant. Speed in football is more about timing of movement than blistering pace. Maradona was not the quickest footballer, but technically a genius, with great vision and great timing. Maldini, Silva, Donato and Costacota played in the 80's and are still playing & were still playing up to 2004.
Many of todays top players Pirlo, Ibrahimovic, Luca Toni, Trezeguet, Diego, Beckham, Requelme etc, are no where as quick or technically as good  as Cruyff, Pele, Beckenbauer, Maradona or Esuebio. I would argue with anyone that those players mentioned could play today (not at their present age though   )

[Bitter]

The thread is best era of football. Not who would beat whom. The various eras were not exposed to the science of today (medical, training etc), pitch quality, referee protection etc.
On a World stage I would say late 60's and 70's. This time period exposed football to some of
the true greats

for some people..best era would include would be defined by who would beat whom. you can't dictate how people will interpret 'best era'. it is open to interpretation..just as you have your own interpretation

Ok I understand! but they will never play, so we will never know.

People will also argue that a team today could not play back in 1969. Put ManU on a bumpy dry pitch in Sao Paulo versus Santos 1969 with a referee from 1969 and and and 

yeah..this topic is pure subjectivity. But seriously, ManU destroying any side from 1969. 

Nah!

Ah 1969 Santos side would use a heavier ball, have the same ball skills, and would buss one setta kick on anyone of them sorf man from today who looking to dive and fall down if the breeze blowing too hard.

Rooney and Vidic would enjoy themselves though.

[Filho]

The thread is best era of football. Not who would beat whom. The various eras were not exposed to the science of today (medical, training etc), pitch quality, referee protection etc.
On a World stage I would say late 60's and 70's. This time period exposed football to some of
the true greats

for some people..best era would include would be defined by who would beat whom. you can't dictate how people will interpret 'best era'. it is open to interpretation..just as you have your own interpretation

Ok I understand! but they will never play, so we will never know.

People will also argue that a team today could not play back in 1969. Put ManU on a bumpy dry pitch in Sao Paulo versus Santos 1969 with a referee from 1969 and and and 

yeah..this topic is pure subjectivity. But seriously, ManU destroying any side from 1969. 

Nah!

Ah 1969 Santos side would use a heavier ball, have the same ball skills, and would buss one setta kick on anyone of them sorf man from today who looking to dive and fall down if the breeze blowing too hard.

Rooney and Vidic would enjoy themselves though.

Tevez too 

[g]

In my opinion the 90s was the best era simply cause of the emergence of talent from non traditional football powerhouses...

Players from Africa, Eastern Europe and Scandinavia and became household names

The football became more global....

[capodetutticapi]

my 86 argentina could beat anybody