Footballing Hot Takes

[Live in the Now]

I think it's fair to say Mbappe will win a Bd'O at some point. But how great he can be is hard to tell just yet. Will he be another Messi/Ronaldo, or just another Owen...

(BTW Owen had played 2 EPL games at age 18).

Won't be another Owen. Can't see him constantly having hamstring and knee injuries like that. Looks a lot more sturdy in his legs.

Coaches also seem to know how to train better to keep their players available to play more games. The players of this generation seemed to come around in a good era.

 

[cgf]

-Gladbach currently have at least three midfielders who'll be able to play for just about any team in the world in their primes: Neuhaus, Benes, Cuisance & Zakaria

-Arne Maier & Denis Geiger are well on their way to joining the Weigl/Kimmich debates about who will be Kroos/Biscuits successor.

-Mahmoud Dahoud should be a starter for the german NT and starting him in place of Can at the euros would've been enough to prevent France from pulling off the upset in the semis.

-Johannes Eggestein will be even better than Timo Werner & Fiete Arp.

-Hungary & Romania have some really interesting young talents, and one of them will get out of the group stages in the euros by the time these new generations are done.

-The Czech's new generation will make them major tournament regulars once again.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

My hot take:

Harry Winks is at a similar level of talent as Dele Alli.

 

[hatterson]

The talk about Mbappe brings up my possibly hot take.

Neymar will never win a Ballon d’Or

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Belgium's starting XI is way better than England's and at least their backup attacking players are also way better than England's.

Courtois vs. Pickford. Advantage Belgium
Meunier vs. Walker. Advantage England
Alderweireld vs. Maguire. Advantage Belgium
Vertonghen vs. Stones. Advantage Belgium
Lukaku vs Rose. Advantage England
Dembele vs. Dier. Push.
Tielemans vs. Winks. Push.
DeBruyne vs. Alli. Advantage Belgium.
Mertens vs. Sterling. Push.
Hazard vs. Rashford. Advantage Belgium.
Lukaku vs. Kane. Advantage England.

5 advantage Belgium, 3 advantage England, 3 pushes. Not "way better".

 

[cgf]

Those are some mighty liberal pushes.

 

[Live in the Now]

Courtois vs. Pickford. Advantage Belgium
Meunier vs. Walker. Advantage England
Alderweireld vs. Maguire. Advantage Belgium
Vertonghen vs. Stones. Advantage Belgium
Lukaku vs Rose. Advantage England
Dembele vs. Dier. Push.
Tielemans vs. Winks. Push.
Mertens vs. Sterling. Push.
Hazard vs. Rashford. Advantage Belgium.
Lukaku vs. Kane. Advantage England.

5 advantage Belgium, 3 advantage England, 3 pushes. Not "way better".

That's not even Belgium's best 11. You didn't put down de Bruyne lmao. You have to put him in Tielemans spot and Carrasco in Mertens spot. Martinez also loves Fellaini for some reason.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

That's not even Belgium's best 11. You didn't put down de Bruyne lmao. You have to put him in Tielemans spot and Carrasco in Mertens spot.

I had only listed 10 for each team by accident, you responded before my edit, but I was accounting for DeBruyne already as better than Alli.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Those are some mighty liberal pushes.

Not really. All those Spurs CM are around the same level, and Sterling is having an excellent season. Mertens is very good, but Sterling also is. Sterling has really improved under Guardiola. You could also argue a push for Stones vs. Vertonghen, although I wouldn't yet, but Stones is having a very good season. Could also argue Winks vs. Tielemans is in England's favor.

Belgium has a better 11 if I had to choose, but I don't think there's much of a difference.

 

[Live in the Now]

Their team is a lot better. The advantages you listed are at positions that don't matter as much. With creators like Hazard and de Bruyne you can put an extremely young Origi in there and still win. This is proven to be true because they did it in 2014. Then it's fullbacks which only matters in terms of comparing fullbacks to the attackers they are facing.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Their team is a lot better. The advantages you listed are at positions that don't matter as much. With creators like Hazard and de Bruyne you can put an extremely young Origi in there and still win. This is proven to be true because they did it in 2014. Then it's fullbacks which only matters in terms of comparing fullbacks to the attackers they are facing.

England also has more depth, and you are not accounting for how much striker matters. Kane is considerably better than Lukaku who might not even the best United striker in this England vs. Belgium discussion.

 

[Deficient Mode]

Belgium's GK, attackers, and central defenders are clearly better. I'd favor the midfield pairing of Tielemans-Dembele over Dier-Winks too. As LITN said, those are the most important positions by far. Except at full back, there isn't a part of the field where England really have an advantage.

 

[Live in the Now]

England also has more depth, and you are not accounting for how much striker matters. Kane is considerably better than Lukaku who might not even the best United striker in this England vs. Belgium discussion.

They do but it isn't all quality depth. At striker they have no depth and Belgium has some good midfield depth too. Quality over quantity anyway. You can only bring 23 to a tournament and you'll only want to play 14-18 of them.

I think that's why our country keeps losing because when trying to qualify for tournaments we call in about 70 or 80 players and that may not be an exaggeration.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

I was basing it off the previously mentioned XI which would have a midfield of Dier, Henderson, Alli and a front of Sterling, Kane, and Rashford.

I’d say Llalana should be in there ahead of Alli or Henderson, personally. But either way I see Dembele as massively overrated and Wanyama as a good but not great player.

Ah, I missed the mentioned players.

First of all I think a 3-4-2-1 would be better suited for England than a 4-3-3. We have very good quality wingbacks who we should give as much space on the flanks as possible. We also have the centre-half's to sustain a back three IMO. The players behind Kane have quite a free role. So if I were to use the same formation for England, I'd probably replace Rashford with Lallana in England's attacking trident. But even then I do not really agree that Sterling-Kane-Lallana is better than Son/Dele - Kane - Eriksen.

As for the deeper midfielders, you'd probably want more of an anchor and a box-to-box player. I find that Dier is a superior anchor than Henderson, and that Harry Winks is England's best fit for the box-to-box role because he is also a very progressive and creative passer. Spurs play better with him than they do with Dembele IMO. So that's Spurs second best anchor and their best box-to-box as deeper midfielders for England.

So I argue that Spurs have a superior goalkeeper, defense, midfield and attack than England.

 

[cgf]

England also has more depth, and you are not accounting for how much striker matters. Kane is considerably better than Lukaku who might not even the best United striker in this England vs. Belgium discussion.

Germany won the last WC with the corpse of Miroslav Klose as their only striker...

 

[Live in the Now]

Creators matter way more than a striker in WC/Euro games. The last Euro was won by EDER of all people. I don't remember how many goals Lewandowski had but I don't remember him doing anything, and he was probably the best striker at the last Euro. It totally didn't matter at all.

The strikers that matter the most in international football are the ones that create for themselves. Suarez and Grizz being obvious examples. Sanchez another, but they won't be at the next WC. A striker that doesn't create for themselves may only get one or two chances in an international game. Ian Rush had a good comment about this some years ago.

 

[cgf]

Creators matter way more than a striker in WC/Euro games. The last Euro was won by EDER of all people. I don't remember how many goals Lewandowski had but I don't remember him doing anything.

The strikers that matter the most in international football are the ones that create for themselves. Suarez and Grizz being obvious examples. A striker that doesn't create for themselves may only get one or two chances in an international game. Ian Rush had a good comment about this some years ago.

I fully agree with most of your post...but Lewa actually played a big roll in Poland's run to that quarterfinal penalty-defeat to Portugal. That may have been the only game he scored in, but the attention he drew and his work to bring his team-mates into it was pivotal for Poland. Plus the threat of Lewa forced teams to attack the poles more cautiously, which played right into their tough & compact hands.

But Lewa making that big of an impact doesn't mean that Kane will, as Lewa is a much more complete player than his english counterpart and his NT is shaped around him in a way england is not.

 

[Live in the Now]

I fully agree with most of your post...but Lewa actually played a big roll in Poland's run to that quarterfinal penalty-defeat to Portugal. That may have been the only game he scored in, but the attention he drew and his work to bring his team-mates into it was pivotal for Poland. Plus the threat of Lewa forced teams to attack the poles more cautiously, which played right into their tough & compact hands.

But Lewa making that big of an impact doesn't mean that Kane will, as Lewa is a much more complete player than his english counterpart and his NT is shaped around him in a way england is not.

All good points, especially about the compact nature of these games. Uruguay's had two of the best strikers for ages now but they've only won one tournament and didn't make the final in any of the others. They also have a great defense, but who can get them the ball with enough space to score? Clearly nobody.

I also liked what Poland did but I'm not sure England couldn't have done similar with a different manager, and I don't know who will do better at the WC either. Even if they do both teams don't have the wealth of creative riches that Belgium has. Every international team would love to have Hazard and de Bruyne and those are the kinds of players that usually decide these games.

It's not like Kane is going to go out there and bash two goals in. Maybe against Panama but otherwise international football doesn't work that way. The Hazard's, Hamez's, Cou's, Grizz's, Iniesta's, Neymar's, Modric's, Messi's, Ozil's are the players who need to be watched out for to score goals. Tons of evidence of this too. I think the last few Golden Boot winners all played behind a big Kane or Lewandowski like striker, or were thought of as primarily playmakers, but they scored anyway. Like Sneijder. Don't know who would ever have guessed that would happen.

 

[MrFunnyWobbl]

I'm not sure I need to do this because I think some posters in this forum think every post I make is a hot take.

 

[Deficient Mode]

All good points, especially about the compact nature of these games. Uruguay's had two of the best strikers for ages now but they've only won one tournament and didn't make the final in any of the others. They also have a great defense, but who can get them the ball with enough space to score? Clearly nobody.

I also liked what Poland did but I'm not sure England couldn't have done similar with a different manager, and I don't know who will do better at the WC either. Even if they do both teams don't have the wealth of creative riches that Belgium has. Every international team would love to have Hazard and de Bruyne and those are the kinds of players that usually decide these games.

It's not like Kane is going to go out there and bash two goals in. Maybe against Panama but otherwise international football doesn't work that way. The Hazard's, Hamez's, Cou's, Grizz's, Iniesta's, Neymar's, Modric's, Messi's, Ozil's are the players who need to be watched out for to score goals. Tons of evidence of this too. I think the last few Golden Boot winners all played behind a big Kane or Lewandowski like striker, or were thought of as primarily playmakers, but they scored anyway. Like Sneijder. Don't know who would ever have guessed that would happen.

Uruguay's problem is that they not only don't have a high level creative player, they don't have high level midfielders at all.

 

[Cassano]

Rather have Lallana than Dembele, but neither are my favorite player. Laughed hard that somebody was bigging up England and didn't mention him. He's pretty much the only English CM who can score a good amount of goals. For some reason everyone seems to think he plays attacking midfielder with Liverpool but not really.

Completely forgot about him as well with his injury. Still as a b2b, I don't think any English player is better than Dembele. And he's probably 3rd choice for Belgium!

 

[Savant]

Hot Take:

Madrid gets rid of Zidane this summer. They replace him with Pochettino and he brings Kane with him.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Hot Take:

Madrid gets rid of Zidane this summer. They replace him with Pochettino and he brings Kane with him.

Don't think he would last long in that case.

 

[Savant]

Don't think he would last long in that case.

It’s Madrid, very few do. (Not a hot take)

 

[S E P H]

For every single goal Salah scores, he misses five sitters.