- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: England and WC 2014
Posted on 12/21/12 at 1:45 am to acgeaux129
Posted on 12/21/12 at 1:45 am to acgeaux129
quote:
truly internationally elite players on their starting squad that I know of are Hart and Rooney
Wilshere held his own against Barca at 19...
1
Posted on 12/21/12 at 1:58 am to Jumbeauxlaya
Regardless of the outcome of the 2014 WC, England has plenty to look forward to. They have a solid generation of young talent playing at top clubs. Their style is evolving and it's only for the better. They will have a young team in 2014, but Gerrard might still be there and have a similar effect that Pirlo had on the Italian team in the Euros: leadership, consistency, control, experience.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 2:22 am to LSUSOBEAST1
I don't care about playing style. While struggling for Arsenal, Walcott has been a key contributor for England. We aren't talking about FUT here. Ribery is 10x him in value, regardless of dissimilarities in the way they play. But get off this clown France tangent and actually give real arguments about England's talent, because none have been made so far.
I like Wilshere and think he has great upside, but this talk of him being able to carry the team is dum. He's not a bad player at all. But this thread was built on the premise that England is supposed to be able to play with anyone in the world. The fact that Germany has several CAMs way better than supposedly England's biggest gamechanger should be a cause for concern.
I like Wilshere and think he has great upside, but this talk of him being able to carry the team is dum. He's not a bad player at all. But this thread was built on the premise that England is supposed to be able to play with anyone in the world. The fact that Germany has several CAMs way better than supposedly England's biggest gamechanger should be a cause for concern.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 2:31 am
Posted on 12/21/12 at 2:23 am to LSUSOBEAST1
Give me what you think would be their ideal lineup in 2014.
This sounds very similar to what US fans say.
quote:
Regardless of the outcome of the 2014 WC, England has plenty to look forward to. They have a solid generation of young talent playing at top clubs. Their style is evolving and it's only for the better.
This sounds very similar to what US fans say.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 2:25 am
Posted on 12/21/12 at 7:21 am to acgeaux129
I dont think anyone in here is saying they will knock off Germany or Brazil, but that the young talent promises to be more competitive in future world cups than the previous generation of Gerrard and Co.
Oh and this
Oh and this
Posted on 12/21/12 at 7:32 am to glassman
quote:
Good God man. You are such a troll.
Says the Arsenal fans who spend an entire page pinning English hopes on Theo Walcott and glass Wilshere.
ETA: I like both of these players but it's pretty clear at this point Walcott is never going to reach his potential for whatever reason and Wilshere is like 20 years old and has barely played soccer in over a year. One game against Barcelona two years ago is hardly proof he is going to be able to lead the English midfield in Brazil.
Also, if you don't think Cahill, Jagielka, Lescott, and/or Jones are a significant downgrade from Terry then I don't know what to tell you.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 7:46 am
Posted on 12/21/12 at 8:47 am to glassman
Really ??? England is in SECOND place in it's qualifying group with ties against mighty Poland and Ukraine. Group 8 is one of the weakest overall so your Brits may be able to eek out qualifying, but it's far from a done deal !
Englands penchant for shitting the bed over and over and over again in International tourneys, is almost legend by now...LOL
Englands penchant for shitting the bed over and over and over again in International tourneys, is almost legend by now...LOL
Posted on 12/21/12 at 10:30 am to acgeaux129
quote:
France has locker room issues but England shouldnt with terry in there to calm things down. My b dude.
Yeah, the dude who cheated on his wife and fricked his teammate's baby mama is the guy to calm things down in the locker room. Brilliant.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 10:38 am to cwil177
A little slow, huh?
Posted on 12/21/12 at 11:15 am to cwil177
Some of you people are mad...
I think the emphasis by the English in general on Wilshere has to do with how hard they screwed Scholes. Scholes was the most technically gifted English midfielder of his generation, who was pushed wide left to accommodate Gerrard and Lampard. Had Scholes been the DLP in 2006 next to Hargreaves (who could have been the best English DM of his generation if not for injuries). Gerrard and Lampard are fine players in their roles, but they don't value possession as they should, especially at the international level, where the pace of the game is slower, and the game is more pensive. Scholes was a better passer than both, and could dictate the game much better than any other English CM. The fact he retired when he was thirty is a testament to everything wrong with English football at the international level. It's brutish, simplistic, reactive, and technically poor. It will never win anything because the English mentality reverts back to the late 70's and 80s, when English teams were the best on the continent before the Heysel disaster. A game based on technique from deep within midfield is the future of the game.
Which brings us to Wilshere. He will never be a AM at the international level. He's a player who will dictate tempo to the opposition in a really important way. The fact of the matter is that at the international level, the most successful teams since the change in the offside rule in 2005, the team with the best DLP has won every Euro and WC. Italy and Spain have had the two best DLP's of our generation, and it's no surprise both teams have been so successful. Not only that, the Paraguay team that reached the final of the Copa America was successful largely to its defense, and the underrated play of CM Nestor Ortigoza, who dictated the tempo of the game so so well.
What England has always needed is a player who valued possession, who loves the ball, who is willing to wait a moment before playing a forward pass to no one. Wilshere drives from midfield to support the attack better than most young midfielders. He's obviously not the most talented young midfielder, but I don't think saying that England's success in the future will be based on him, and possibly players like Josh McEachran and George Throne, who could play the DLP role if they develop, and if Wilshere develops as a AM more than a DLP.
I think the emphasis by the English in general on Wilshere has to do with how hard they screwed Scholes. Scholes was the most technically gifted English midfielder of his generation, who was pushed wide left to accommodate Gerrard and Lampard. Had Scholes been the DLP in 2006 next to Hargreaves (who could have been the best English DM of his generation if not for injuries). Gerrard and Lampard are fine players in their roles, but they don't value possession as they should, especially at the international level, where the pace of the game is slower, and the game is more pensive. Scholes was a better passer than both, and could dictate the game much better than any other English CM. The fact he retired when he was thirty is a testament to everything wrong with English football at the international level. It's brutish, simplistic, reactive, and technically poor. It will never win anything because the English mentality reverts back to the late 70's and 80s, when English teams were the best on the continent before the Heysel disaster. A game based on technique from deep within midfield is the future of the game.
Which brings us to Wilshere. He will never be a AM at the international level. He's a player who will dictate tempo to the opposition in a really important way. The fact of the matter is that at the international level, the most successful teams since the change in the offside rule in 2005, the team with the best DLP has won every Euro and WC. Italy and Spain have had the two best DLP's of our generation, and it's no surprise both teams have been so successful. Not only that, the Paraguay team that reached the final of the Copa America was successful largely to its defense, and the underrated play of CM Nestor Ortigoza, who dictated the tempo of the game so so well.
What England has always needed is a player who valued possession, who loves the ball, who is willing to wait a moment before playing a forward pass to no one. Wilshere drives from midfield to support the attack better than most young midfielders. He's obviously not the most talented young midfielder, but I don't think saying that England's success in the future will be based on him, and possibly players like Josh McEachran and George Throne, who could play the DLP role if they develop, and if Wilshere develops as a AM more than a DLP.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 11:27 am to acgeaux129
charlie austin's coming out party.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 11:36 am to acgeaux129
quote:
I don't care about playing style.
I'm not sure what you want me to tell you then. What kind of answer are you looking for? If you are unaware of the impact of style of play in the international game then I have no answers for you.
Additionally, you are an Arsenal fan..am I right? It seems to me you know very little about your own players. You talk about the value comparison between RIbery and Walcott, yet you fail to acknowledge the outstanding season Walcott is having. He is every bit as important to his club as Ribery is to his (regardless of "value"). You also seem to be unaware of the role Wilshere will have in an English midfield.
Furthermore, I have already presented you with a pool of roughly 25 (mostly young) English players. The majority of those players are technically sound and like to play short passes on the turf, which is already a major step up from the previous generation. This will be key when competing in international tournaments. Not to mention they will have a world class keeper and striker, two supremely important qualities most top countries have.
Your original premise asked about "bright spots" and "optimism." Yet your argument has virtually centered around comparing them to Germany, which is both idiotic and unfair. You bring up losing Gerrard and Lampard, but if you are familiar with English history at all, you would know this is nothing but a good thing. Gerrard may still be around in 2014 and may be capable of playing the DLP role. He will have at least 2 seasons in Rodgers' system by then and that will help complete him as a player. It seems Rodgers is valuing Gerrard's longevity over immediate success by playing him in a deeper role. His game has already changed and that can only help England's chances.
You know it's a silly argument when I am defending an English national team.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 11:40 am
Posted on 12/21/12 at 11:48 am to LSUSOBEAST1
quote:
Joe Hart, Glen Johnson, Leighton Baines, Gary Cahill, Ryan Shawcross, Jonjo Shelvey, Tom Cleverly, Jack Wilshere, Jordan Henderson, Raheem Sterling, Wilfried Zaha, Tom Ince, Ox, Wayne Rooney, Danny Welbeck, Jermaine Defoe, Daniel Sturridge, Andy Carroll, Kyle Walker, Phil Jagielka, Martin Kelly, Ryan Bertrand, Aaron Lennon, etc.
Can any of these blokes convert a penalty? Because we all know that's England's truest stumbling block on the international stage.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 11:55 am to WarSlamEagle
That list doesn't even include Phil Jones, Josh McEchran, Jon Flanagan, Jack Robinson, Steven Caulker, Andre Wisdom, Kyle Bartley, Jack Rodwell, Conor Coady, Nick Powell, Nathan Redmond, Andros Townsend, Adam Morgan, Carl Jenkinson or Ravel Morrison. All U21 players I believe.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 11:57 am
Posted on 12/21/12 at 11:57 am to LSUSOBEAST1
BUT CAN THEY SCORE OFF OF A SPOT KICK, BEAST? CAN THEY?
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:01 pm to LSUSOBEAST1
I was semi-trolling on Ribery vs. Walcott in the initial post since it was overly sarcastic anyway. I was less than sober and using my phone in the driveway of a friend's house which explains the crazy capitalization and stuff. Regardless, since you insist...
What on earth are you going on about here? You just allowed yourself to get way off from the point. The question is, who's better? Ribery does everything that Walcott can do and is way more complete. What can Walcott do that is elite? He's very fast, makes good runs, and can finish. That's about it.
Why is this relatively good season for him relevant to the point I was trying to make regarding his overall quality? You're not suggesting that he's comparable to Ribery in value, are you? My larger point is that England has NO ONE on the same level as Ribery in terms of playmaking and quality in the midfield. He is insanely more valuable, and his play for Bayern actually translates pretty well into the French midfield.
Keep in mind this all stems from you singling out one of the teams I listed that I could consider being debatable. And then a subpoint based on players. I haven't even mentioned Evra, Clichy, Koscielny yet. Or Benzema for stirker. If Walcott is having a good season, Giroud has definitely been coming into his own in the EPL. However, you have succeeded in putting me on the defensive on a relatively weaker point. I guess you should go to law school.
Back to England. If you look at the truly elite teams in the EPL, young English midfielders are a severe rarity. I noticed you haven't defended Wilshere too much in here.
And I honestly have not seen a pool of 25 players posted in this thread.
lol wut? I mentioned that once that I know of, maybe twice. How about the two South American powers I mentioned? Wilshere doesn't scratch their lineups in meaningful playing time. Additionally, he's one of the two names that's been provided and has been touted as a guy that's going to change the English national team, which is a joke.
quote:
If you are unaware of the impact of style of play in the international game then I have no answers for you
What on earth are you going on about here? You just allowed yourself to get way off from the point. The question is, who's better? Ribery does everything that Walcott can do and is way more complete. What can Walcott do that is elite? He's very fast, makes good runs, and can finish. That's about it.
quote:
Additionally, you are an Arsenal fan..am I right? It seems to me you know very little about your own players. You talk about the value comparison between RIbery and Walcott, yet you fail to acknowledge the outstanding season Walcott is having.
Why is this relatively good season for him relevant to the point I was trying to make regarding his overall quality? You're not suggesting that he's comparable to Ribery in value, are you? My larger point is that England has NO ONE on the same level as Ribery in terms of playmaking and quality in the midfield. He is insanely more valuable, and his play for Bayern actually translates pretty well into the French midfield.
Keep in mind this all stems from you singling out one of the teams I listed that I could consider being debatable. And then a subpoint based on players. I haven't even mentioned Evra, Clichy, Koscielny yet. Or Benzema for stirker. If Walcott is having a good season, Giroud has definitely been coming into his own in the EPL. However, you have succeeded in putting me on the defensive on a relatively weaker point. I guess you should go to law school.
Back to England. If you look at the truly elite teams in the EPL, young English midfielders are a severe rarity. I noticed you haven't defended Wilshere too much in here.
And I honestly have not seen a pool of 25 players posted in this thread.
quote:
Yet your argument has virtually centered around comparing them to Germany, which is both idiotic and unfair.
lol wut? I mentioned that once that I know of, maybe twice. How about the two South American powers I mentioned? Wilshere doesn't scratch their lineups in meaningful playing time. Additionally, he's one of the two names that's been provided and has been touted as a guy that's going to change the English national team, which is a joke.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:02 pm to WarSlamEagle
So in response to his question, I will consolidate to help him out.
quote:
Can you name names?
Joe Hart, Fraser Forster, Glen Johnson, Steven Gerrard, Leighton Baines, Gary Cahill, Ryan Shawcross, Jonjo Shelvey, Tom Cleverly, Jack Wilshere, Jordan Henderson, Raheem Sterling, Wilfried Zaha, Tom Ince, Ox, Wayne Rooney, Danny Welbeck, Jermaine Defoe, Daniel Sturridge, Andy Carroll, Kyle Walker, Phil Jagielka, Martin Kelly, Ryan Bertrand, Aaron Lennon, Phil Jones, Josh McEchran, Jon Flanagan, Jack Robinson, Steven Caulker, Andre Wisdom, Kyle Bartley, Jack Rodwell, Conor Coady, Nick Powell, Nathan Redmond, Andros Townsend, Adam Morgan, Carl Jenkinson, Ravel Morrison.
I'm sure there is plenty of top talent I'm forgetting as well.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 12:13 pm
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:06 pm to LSUSOBEAST1
Wait...that's your list?
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:43 pm to LSUSOBEAST1
Nathan Baker, Matthew Lowton, Ashley Westwood.
Possibly Delph, Albrighton and Gary Gardner if they step up their game.
Possibly Delph, Albrighton and Gary Gardner if they step up their game.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:53 pm to BobLoblaw
That's a pretty solid talent pool Woy has to choose from.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News