Forza_Italia Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 If you had to Rate the Top 10 International teams in the World from 1930 till now how would you rate them and why! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettermirror Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 1. North Korea 1960 2. USA 1950 (that's the year they beat England right?) 3. South Korea 2002 ... the rest are non-starters really! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forza_Italia Posted October 27, 2006 Author Share Posted October 27, 2006 1. BRAZIL- 5 world cups , great international record Also made the finals in 1950, semi finals 1978 several south American cups 2. ITALY- 4 World cups, Also impressive International record, 1 Euro Cup made the finals in 1970, 1994, 2000(Euro), 3rd 1990, and 4th 1978 3 GERMANY 3 World cups, 3 Euro cups, made the finals 1982, 1986, 2000, 4. ARGENTINA 2 World Cups Made the Final 1990, as well won the South American cup 5. FRANCE 1 World Cup 2 Euro Cups, made the final in 2006, 4th in 1982 6 URUGUAY 2 World cups , havent done too much recently , but a team who is still full of history. 7. ENGLAND 1 World Cup, Always a team that competes. Havent done much of late but still can pose a threat and considered good team 8. 9,10 cann go either way with teams like Holland, Mexico, Portugual, Czech, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 The top 10 NT's of all time would be an interesting topic. The top 10 countries, not so interesting. For the former, I'll get it started with: - Brasil 1982 (plus the other obvious ones) - Hungary mid-fifties - Holland 1974-1978, 1988 - France 1998-2000 - Argentina 1978 - Germany 1972 - 1974 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caccamo1 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 quote: The top 10 NT's of all time would be an interesting topic. The top 10 countries, not so interesting. For the former, I'll get it started with: - Brasil 1982 (plus the other obvious ones) - Hungary mid-fifties - Holland 1974-1978, 1988 - France 1998-2000 - Argentina 1978 - Germany 1972 - 1974 You are talking about the best NT's and you put Brazil 82'. How is that possible when Italy won the world cup in 1982 and they didn't make the final four because Italy beat them in the second round? Maybe they had the best individuals but not the best team. A bit ironic, Brazil had the "dream team" and the best individuals in 1982 and Italy ended up winning, and this past World Cup Brazil had stars like Ronaldinho, Kaka, Adriano, Robinho, Ronaldo etc (another dream team) and Italy ended up winning again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 quote:Originally posted by caccamo1 You are talking about the best NT's and you put Brazil 82'. How is that possible when Italy won the world cup in 1982 and they didn't make the final four because Italy beat them in the second round? Maybe they had the best individuals but not the best team. The best teams don't neessarily win the world cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 quote:Originally posted by caccamo1 You are talking about the best NT's and you put Brazil 82'. How is that possible when Italy won the world cup in 1982 and they didn't make the final four because Italy beat them in the second round? Maybe they had the best individuals but not the best team. A bit ironic, Brazil had the "dream team" and the best individuals in 1982 and Italy ended up winning, and this past World Cup Brazil had stars like Ronaldinho, Kaka, Adriano, Robinho, Ronaldo etc (another dream team) and Italy ended up winning again. Hey look at the poster history, he's putting every soccer powerhouse in his list except Italy......don't waste your time with him. I've seen 5 WC in my life, starting with Italy 90 and the best 2 WC winner I've seen are Brazil 2002 for their attractive football and Italy 2006 for the team concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villus Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 best team of all time USA 2006 WC squad blahahahahhaahhah just thought I would throw in the most hyped team that was horrible of all time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 If it's so obvious that the 2002 Brazil team is among the top 10, you'll have to explain to me how Italy 2006 isn't among the best? If you're giving so much importance to the continent the Cup was played you should also look at the opposition, Brazil had an easy run in 2002 compare to what Italy had this year. Sorry I was responding to amacpher post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 quote:Originally posted by loyola If it's so obvious that the 2002 Brazil team is among the top 10, you'll have to explain to me how Italy 2006 isn't among the best? If you're giving so much importance to the continent the Cup was played you should also look at the opposition, Brazil had an easy run in 2002 compare to what Italy had this year. Sorry I was responding to amacpher post. WTF happened to my post? Computer not working. uhh.. I don't think Italy had such tough opponents this year. They had the easiest draw by far in the quarters, and not a very tough one in the 2nd round either. Brasil had a fairly easy draw too, but Belgium, Turkey, England and Germany are no easier than Ukraine, Australia, Germany and France. And Brasil won all their games much easier than Italy 2006. And yes winning on another continent must be factored-in. Brasil made their opponents look bad 2002, but all the big Euro nations struggled against even weaker sides than those that Brasil swept away with ease. Funny how people talk about how impressive S. korea was and how easy Brasil had it against the likes of Turkey. [8)] If you wanna argue for Italy, their best team was 1982 when they had to advance through what was a true group of death (nothing like their 2006 group who only spazzo septics argue was so tough). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 1978 Holland in final despite the tournament being held in America 1986 Germany in final despite the tournament being held in America 1990 Argentina in final despite the tournament being held in Europe 1994 Italy in the final despite the tournament being held in America 1998 Brazil in the final despite the tournament being held in Europe It didn't seemed to be a problem for those teams to get to the final when they were "away". Yes, they all lost but for the exception of Brazil 1998 and Holland 1978 (playing against the host) I'm not sure the fact they were playing on another continent did change a lot for the final game when they already played on that continent for a month prior to this game. In days where pretty much all decent south americans players are playing in Europe I think South Americans side have an advantage when playing a WC in Europe compare to Europeans playing a WC in America. As for Italy's group I still think that it was the toughest with Holland and Argentina (who were both qualified after their first 2 games, who weren't that tough to be honest). Compared that to China, Costa Rica and Turkey, I think it was way tougher. As for the second round games, I think it's pretty equal between 2002 and 2006. You said that Brazil made their opponent looked bad, of course if you were expecting China and Costa Rica to hold Brazil to scoreless draw you might have been impressed but after those games Brazil didn't made anybody looked bad (for the exception of David Seaman). Brazil were so dominant that they needed goalkeeping mistakes from Seaman and Kahn to win the WC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 quote:Originally posted by loyola 1978 Holland in final despite the tournament being held in America 1986 Germany in final despite the tournament being held in America 1990 Argentina in final despite the tournament being held in Europe 1994 Italy in the final despite the tournament being held in America 1998 Brazil in the final despite the tournament being held in Europe It didn't seemed to be a problem for those teams to get to the final when they were "away". - Italy '94 finished 16th out of 24 teams during the group-stage - Argentina '90: is there a match they won that didn't go to penalties? Not to mention the loss to Cameroon. - Germany '86: they won 3 games out of 7. And Holland I included in my top 10 NTs of all time. It's a silly point you *try* to make too. I mean in non-Euro world cups, 80% of the teams competing are from outside the continent that its being played-in. So naturally some will go deep into the competition by default. I guess there needs to be 2 CONCACAF teams playing the 1994 World cup final to show that there's a significant home-continent advantage? [|)] quote: Yes, they all lost but for the exception of Brazil 1998 and Holland 1978 (playing against the host) I'm not sure the fact they were playing on another continent did change a lot for the final game when they already played on that continent for a month prior to this game. Only Brasil has shown the capability to do anything with consistency away from their continent. And... well... they're Brasil. quote: As for Italy's group I still think that it was the toughest with Holland and Argentina (who were both qualified after their first 2 games, who weren't that tough to be honest). Compared that to China, Costa Rica and Turkey, I think it was way tougher. As for the second round games, I think it's pretty equal between 2002 and 2006. Actually, in that particular comparison, I don't even think the strength of the group matters. It's not like the Brasil'02 team would have struggled to qualify in the Italy '06 group, especially if the tourney was played in South America. What matters more is the knockout-phase opponents and location. quote: You said that Brazil made their opponent looked bad, of course if you were expecting China and Costa Rica to hold Brazil to scoreless draw you might have been impressed but after those games Brazil didn't made anybody looked bad (for the exception of David Seaman). Brazil were so dominant that they needed goalkeeping mistakes from Seaman and Kahn to win the WC. Glad you agree Brasil made their opponents look bad. Funny too how all but 1 of the teams Brasil beat in that world cup didn't lose to anybody else. Costa Rica, Turkey, Belgium, England and Germany all went undefeated outside of their match with Brasil. That's 19 matches undefeated for those 5 teams excluding their Brasil matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 What is a 'spazzo septic'? I would like to know as I apparently am one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 quote:Originally posted by Ed What is a 'spazzo septic'? I would like to know as I apparently am one. 'septic' = Yank. 'spazzo' because most people who judge the group as being soooo tough are staring at the pre-World Cup FIFA rankings at the time. Only spazzos give the FIFA rankings a serious thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Oranje Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 On this question, I tend to agree with most neutral observers. Brazil 1970 was the best team of all time. Others teams that deserve consideration for top 10 are: - Brazil 1958 (won again in 1962) - England 1966 (eliminated by Brazil 1970 in WC 1970) - France 1998 (Euro 2000 Winners) Non-Winners Holland 1974 Hungary 1950s Pick your favourites to fill in the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soju Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 yoink yoink septic toink states may ahve had an easy group in hindsight but going in to the world cup we had no reason to think that group would be easy. Did anyone expect the Czechs to tank it? Ghana more than showed why African teams are such wild cards in their solid showing against Brazil. I'm probably biased though since I still think supporting the US team is better for Canada than shunning it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 quote:Originally posted by Soju yoink yoink septic toink states may ahve had an easy group in hindsight but going in to the world cup we had no reason to think that group would be easy. Did anyone expect the Czechs to tank it? Ghana more than showed why African teams are such wild cards in their solid showing against Brazil. I'm probably biased though since I still think supporting the US team is better for Canada than shunning it. The way I look at it is: Were Italy and Czechs happy about that draw? You bet they were! A World Cup newbie who were awful in the African Cup of Nations, and a team that never performs well in Europe. Compared to Holland and Argentina who would've been pretty worried after seeing the draw. Paired with the best team in Africa and Serbia who was in great form at the time (actually based on early Euro2008 qualifying, there's nothing to suggest that Serbia were ever in poor form). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_Yank Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 quote:Originally posted by amacpher The way I look at it is: Were Italy and Czechs happy about that draw? You bet they were! A World Cup newbie who were awful in the African Cup of Nations, and a team that never performs well in Europe. Compared to Holland and Argentina who would've been pretty worried after seeing the draw. Paired with the best team in Africa and Serbia who was in great form at the time (actually based on early Euro2008 qualifying, there's nothing to suggest that Serbia were ever in poor form). Actually during the aftermath of the world cup draw the Italians were quite upset at being drawn into a supposed "group of death". One italian newspaper went so far as to accuse the German's of "fixing" the draw against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_Yank Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 quote:Originally posted by villus best team of all time USA 2006 WC squad blahahahahhaahhah just thought I would throw in the most hyped team that was horrible of all time No that would be pre tournament favorite Colombia 94 who had a 30 game unfeated streak and had beaten Argentina 5-0 in Buenos Aires. While the Americans played poorly in 2 of there 3 matches no one considered them even a dark horse to win it all. Besides, which is better? Being overrated or not rated at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villus Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 quote:Originally posted by Crazy_Yank No that would be pre tournament favorite Colombia 94 who had a 30 game unfeated streak and had beaten Argentina 5-0 in Buenos Aires. While the Americans played poorly in 2 of there 3 matches no one considered them even a dark horse to win it all. Besides, which is better? Being overrated or not rated at all? Actually no there is a big difference between Colombia 94 and USA 2006. The USA team was just hyped by the US media, they did'nt have a 30 game unbeaten streak, they did'nt beat any powerhouses 5-0 (they dismantled that team in Buenes Aires) they did'nt have any superstar calibre players. The USA team was just bad, and did'nt deserve the hype ,the only thing they had going for them was a FIFA ranking, and everybody knows that does'nt mean anything. Anyone who knows soccer knew that they were not gonna get out of their group. I guess many other people did'nt see this, but because I go to school in the US and had to watch the US WC coverage, they hyped the hell out of that US squad, guys like Wynalda saying they were the shizit. Colombia 94 was an amazing team, they had "El Pebe" Carlos Valderamma who was one of the best players in the world at that time, Freddy Rincon, Faustino Asprilla and a good cast of role players. They beat Argentina and Brazil in a tough qualifying in south america, and a cast of other great players that played really well together. They ended up under performing and from what I heard years ago spent nights out drinking and partying. Their style was good but played too much through the middle, and not with enough purpose, and trying to keep posession for extended periods allowed teams to study and prepare for the best tactics to beat Colombia. So Colombia did not do well, but I will say that, that team leading up to 94 was one of the best International teams of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrennanFan Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 anyone who watched colombia in that time knew they were a one (or 2 at times) trick pony. ALL the balls were going through valderama, and since he was only very good (not great) it was simple to shut them down. the golden age of colombian football resulted in nothing. you know colombians still bring up the 5-0 win against argentina as if was some kind of title? what a joke. Not the best of all time, but one of the best teams ever, and certainly one of the best teams ever to come out of south america was the 1970 Peru team, led by one of the top goal scorers in world cup history Teofilo Cubillas. they wouldve gone far in mexico '70 but they met Pele's Brasil in the quarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villus Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 quote:Originally posted by BrennanFan anyone who watched colombia in that time knew they were a one (or 2 at times) trick pony. ALL the balls were going through valderama, and since he was only very good (not great) it was simple to shut them down. the golden age of colombian football resulted in nothing. you know colombians still bring up the 5-0 win against argentina as if was some kind of title? what a joke. Not the best of all time, but one of the best teams ever, and certainly one of the best teams ever to come out of south america was the 1970 Peru team, led by one of the top goal scorers in world cup history Teofilo Cubillas. they wouldve gone far in mexico '70 but they met Pele's Brasil in the quarters. Well the reason they bring it up is because how many world soccer powers can you name that have lost a game 5-0? Let alone a game that meant something at their stadium. And Colombia and Argentina are big rivals so its nice to rub it in a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_Yank Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 quote:Originally posted by villus Actually no there is a big difference between Colombia 94 and USA 2006. The USA team was just hyped by the US media, they did'nt have a 30 game unbeaten streak, they did'nt beat any powerhouses 5-0 (they dismantled that team in Buenes Aires) they did'nt have any superstar calibre players. The USA team was just bad, and did'nt deserve the hype ,the only thing they had going for them was a FIFA ranking, and everybody knows that does'nt mean anything. Anyone who knows soccer knew that they were not gonna get out of their group. I guess many other people did'nt see this, but because I go to school in the US and had to watch the US WC coverage, they hyped the hell out of that US squad, guys like Wynalda saying they were the shizit. Colombia 94 was an amazing team, they had "El Pebe" Carlos Valderamma who was one of the best players in the world at that time, Freddy Rincon, Faustino Asprilla and a good cast of role players. They beat Argentina and Brazil in a tough qualifying in south america, and a cast of other great players that played really well together. They ended up under performing and from what I heard years ago spent nights out drinking and partying. Their style was good but played too much through the middle, and not with enough purpose, and trying to keep posession for extended periods allowed teams to study and prepare for the best tactics to beat Colombia. So Colombia did not do well, but I will say that, that team leading up to 94 was one of the best International teams of all time. Talk about revisionist history. So "one of the best international teams of all time" to use your words flamed out in the 1st round when they were predicted to win the whole thing. Some how that's less hype than a team that was only hyped in their own country? You can't have it both ways. If the US sucked so bad why did they come off their best qualifying campagin? Why did they post their best record ever from 2004 up to the 2006 world cup? To say the US sucks makes me think you're jealous. What's the point of being jealous when so many positive things are happening for Canada? I don't see too many yanks running around saying Canada sucks. I don't understand the animosity towards US soccer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I think the top five are Hungary in the fifties, before the invasion, the Germany of Beckenbauer and the Holland of Cruyff, and Pele's peaking Brazil in 1970. And the 98 French side, wonderful. I can't speak about the world before the 50s really, can't say a thing about Italy or Uruguay in the early years. Quite honestly, since I have been an adult I have not seen a truly great national team side with the exception of that first shining France under Zidane, I have seen good ones, attractive ones, some fine teams, but not a really impressive side. I don't think any of the Italian or German successes since in the last 25 years are that interesting, except in the context of the given tournament. Argentina was wonderful in Mexico, but I would have liked to see them dominate a bit more to be really convinced, their next WC tournament was below standard in spite of going far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Of the World Cups I have seen (1970 onwards), I would pick the 70 Brazil team and the 74 Germany team as top teams. Holland never did get it done in its two chances. The 98 France team was very good but that final was too fishy for me to put them up with these two picks. For a week or two, I thought the 06 Argentina side would be one for enshrining but they didn't quite have the finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.