What's the standard of football like in League 2 now, compared to.............

[mrfrostsdad]

.............When we won promotion back to the football league in whatever year it was?

I've thought about this quite a bit recently, and in my humble opinion it's way down on what it was then. I know it's difficult to compare sport particularly with something from 20 years ago, but I would evidence my opinion thus:
If we're being really honest, for the great majority of the season we've been awful, but we still have a chance of getting in the play offs. To me that just shows how shocking most teams are in this division. Barrow last Tuesday, Carlsile on New Years Day (I think) to name just two. The best team I've seen this season is Mansfield. Apparently Kings Lynn were good too, but I didn't come over for that one.
What's it down to? Is it the coaching methods? Play along the back line, back to the keeper, play it along the back line etc etc. It's so painful to watch.

There's not a single player in the current team I would play above anyone in that League 2 winning side, not one.

What do others think?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Controversial point but this team would probably beat the division 3 title winning team. I'd say only McIndoe and green from that team (maybe Chris brown) are better players than a lot of our starting eleven, certainly technically.

The game has changed. The game against Mansfield that season away which was a bit of a classic in my mind is on YouTube. Watch it back, the standard is really poor from both sides.  I doubt our crowd would appreciate that style these days.

The last league 2 promotion side though with Marquis, Coppinger etc they'd hammer us now I think.

[Padge_DRFC]

Green, Blundell, Warrington would get in this team as well.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The standard today is unrecognisably higher than it was 20 years ago.

Go watch the video of that seminal Mansfield match. Count how many times the defenders hoy the ball anywhere forward, when not under pressure.

I loved our 03/04 side, but it would get murdered in today's football. The game has moved on so far.

https://youtu.be/Ult5YaQJofQ

[Bentley Bullet]

I watched that Mansfield match recently and was gobsmacked at how poor the football quality was, bearing in mind I thought it was great on the day.

I agree entirely with BST. That side of grafters back then would get their arses kicked now.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Bang on BB.

It's fascinating how Coppinger coped with that increase in the quality of the game, so that in a much better era, in his late 30s he was still outstanding.

[Cramby10]

Controversial point but this team would probably beat the division 3 title winning team. I'd say only McIndoe and green from that team (maybe Chris brown) are better players than a lot of our starting eleven, certainly technically.

The game has changed. The game against Mansfield that season away which was a bit of a classic in my mind is on YouTube. Watch it back, the standard is really poor from both sides.  I doubt our crowd would appreciate that style these days.

The last league 2 promotion side though with Marquis, Coppinger etc they'd hammer us now I think.

i’m not having that one iota. Most ludicrous post I’ve seen for some time. I know it’s all opinions but Warrington, Ryan, Marples, Foster, Green, Mcindoe, Doolan, Blundell and Brown would walk into this team. Well they would if I was manager anyhow.

[steve@dcfd]

None of our current players apart from a fit Rowe and Anderson would be any where near the team that won promotion under DF from league 2. Our acceptance of level of players has gone down.

[ctay]

Mansfield is one game, you would have to judge it on more than that.

Interesting point though. I would tend to say the majority of the side would come from the older side. Always hard to compare generations though, the game has changed... how many times would that lot have got red cards in the current game!

[i_ateallthepies]

The idea that players from different eras are in some way incomparable is flawed.  The game doesn't change so dramatically in 20 years that players are incapable of adapting.  Names already mentioned have amply demonstrated they adapt to new ideas and ways of playing the game, how else does a man like James Coppinger have a professional career of 20+ years.

Others already mentioned; McIndoe, Brown, Green as well as Copps all played two levels higher than L2, not one of our current squad would get into the team ahead of any of them.

[Donny Exile in York]

Not forgetting a young Akinfenwa, he would walk into our team, even the 19 year old version back then!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Mansfield is one game, you would have to judge it on more than that.

Interesting point though. I would tend to say the majority of the side would come from the older side. Always hard to compare generations though, the game has changed... how many times would that lot have got red cards in the current game!

Find me a single game at any professional level this season where there were half as many blind hoofs down the pitch as there were in that video of the Mansfield game.

It's almost impossible to take in how much the game improves over a 20 year span. Sides, on average these days are WAY ahead of where sides at the same level were two decades back.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The idea that players from different eras are in some way incomparable is flawed.  The game doesn't change so dramatically in 20 years that players are incapable of adapting.  Names already mentioned have amply demonstrated they adapt to new ideas and ways of playing the game, how else does a man like James Coppinger have a professional career of 20+ years.

Others already mentioned; McIndoe, Brown, Green as well as Copps all played two levels higher than L2, not one of our current squad would get into the team ahead of any of them.

Coppinger had a 20 year career because he adapted to the improved standard.

And I'm not necessarily saying that players improvement is the whole issue. Tactics improve. If they didn't, you'd still see teams winning titles playing W-M.

It's unarguable that defenders are far, far more comfortable on the ball than they were 20 years ago. And that opens up tactical potential that was literally unthinkable in previous times.

Like I say, go watch that Mansfield match and compare it to today's standard. 

My point is, the 2003 Rovers side playing that style of football would struggle to stay up these days. Possibly, the players would be able to step up to the higher requirements of fitness, comfortableness on the ball and quality of passing. We'll never know. They never had to do it.

[Armthorpe mickler]

Think your doing a disservice to the players of 20 years ago although today's should be fitter.What is the difference is that you were paying a fiver 20 years ago and today it's 20 pound.Even with the recent inflation that's a big jump.

[selby]

  Can't think that any of todays defenders (Olowu maybe) are better than the defenders we used to have. Easy on the eye, better truer pitches to play on, and a less physical game, very poor when in their own half of the field especially around their own penalty area both positionally and physically.
  Teams just play through them, and want them to have the ball knowing they will make a mistake, either a miss kick or a misplaced pass or catch them in possession.
  How many times have we all seen it this season, before people will accept they are poor trying to play that sort of football and poor defenders.

[DonnyOsmond]

Like others have said majority of our current squad will be better than those previous. Athletes just become better with time, Messi is better than Maradona, Cruyff, Pele, Best, etc. You might not like due to nostalgia but it's true.

[Cramby10]

Like others have said majority of our current squad will be better than those previous. Athletes just become better with time, Messi is better than Maradona, Cruyff, Pele, Best, etc. You might not like due to nostalgia but it's true.

absolute b*llocks. Tim ryan, great left foot and would tackle his own mother given chance. Simon Marples, like lightning up the flank overlapping and didn’t get done on the outside. Fozzy would head tackle everything and organise the lot. Greeny, box to box midfielder that would run all day and had a goal in him. Played championship and internationally. Doolan, like a rolls Royce in midfield, superb passer and was a proper mester and organiser. Mcindoe, one of the best lower league players in decades. Blundell, superb pace and movement and scored 20 goals for us in league 2. Browny back then was with Sunderland at the time and had pace, touch, size and a goal in him. Can’t believe I’m having to write this. We’d give our left knacker to have any of those with these attributes in this dreadful squad. Are we forgetting that we don’t score many and can’t really keep em out the other end also?

[DonnyOsmond]

No one said we had shit players back then FYI.

[Cramby10]

No but incredibly you said this current squad is better. Laughable to say the least.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Saying the current game is not as physical as it used to be is plain wrong.

Ask Tom Anderson who has had his face rearranged several times. Or Jon Taylor who had his career ended by a bone shuddering challenge.

And I keep coming back to that Mansfield match on basic quality. Any side today whose defenders regularly humped the ball into orbit when not under pressure wouldn't stand a chance today. The game is faster than ever and players are expected to make quick, accurate passes all over the pitch. They only launch it aimlessly in the most extreme of circumstances.

20 years took you from that 1962 World Cup final (walking football with dozens of misplaced 10 yard passes) to Maradona.

Another 20 years took you to the start of the exquisitely crafted possession football from Spain.

Another 20 years took you to the lung busting brilliance of this year's World Cup final.

None of the sides from 20 years past would have been able to compete with the next generation because the physical and tactical demands advance beyond recognition over each period. That's not to say that the players were useless in each generation. They performed in the context of what football was at their time.

iThe OP asked what the standard of play is like today compared to 20 years ago. In my opinion, it's wilful blindness not to see the revolution in the general standard of play  that happens over 20 years.

[dickos1]

The idea that players from different eras are in some way incomparable is flawed.  The game doesn't change so dramatically in 20 years that players are incapable of adapting.  Names already mentioned have amply demonstrated they adapt to new ideas and ways of playing the game, how else does a man like James Coppinger have a professional career of 20+ years.

Others already mentioned; McIndoe, Brown, Green as well as Copps all played two levels higher than L2, not one of our current squad would get into the team ahead of any of them.

Coppinger had a 20 year career because he adapted to the improved standard.

And I'm not necessarily saying that players improvement is the whole issue. Tactics improve. If they didn't, you'd still see teams winning titles playing W-M.

It's unarguable that defenders are far, far more comfortable on the ball than they were 20 years ago. And that opens up tactical potential that was literally unthinkable in previous times.

Like I say, go watch that Mansfield match and compare it to today's standard. 

My point is, the 2003 Rovers side playing that style of football would struggle to stay up these days. Possibly, the players would be able to step up to the higher requirements of fitness, comfortableness on the ball and quality of passing. We'll never know. They never had to do it.

Not all defenders!
Players like mills, we’re technically very good, especially in comparison to Williams today

[BobG]

 But we are not talking about individual players are we? The subject is the standard of football in league 2 compared to that of 20 years ago. And that is immeasurably higher today in a whole host of aspects.

BobG

[Sammy Chung was King]

The standard was higher back then, the country’s mentality on how we play football has changed. We played more long balls back then as most of football was doing the same. The ability of the players we had then was far superior. The strength of character also. Proper men playing good football mixed in with a more attritional one.

[pib]

Watching that Mansfield clip, it struck me just how much time Blundell had on the ball for the two goals as well, especially the first one. Not sure if the defender (no. 5) was knackered, couldn't be arsed or just couldn't run, but it's actually quite funny watching how little attempt there is to prevent Gregg from scoring the goal. I think it's the same defender waving a half-arsed leg at the 2nd finish too. I must've watched those goals 50 times over the years and it's something I've only just noticed.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The standard was higher back then, the country’s mentality on how we play football has changed. We played more long balls back then as most of football was doing the same. The ability of the players we had then was far superior. The strength of character also. Proper men playing good football mixed in with a more attritional one.

I'm not talking about playing long balls. There's nothing inherently wrong with playing a long pass.

I'm talking about hoofing the ball into the stratosphere.

Watch that video. If you don't see that, I'm not sure what to say.

[selby]

  The biggest differences were Billy, ask this question, what would those players in that team achieved with the facilities and playing surfaces training techniques of today , things this club has because of the success and those players and teams teams that followed.
  We had a management team that had a way of playing and a team of players who suited that style of play, compare that with today, the manager knew the town and what the supporters expected of the players, because he had been a part of our resurrection.
  We had an assistant manager who was seen as a bit of a joker, but had a personality and new how to work the media. Compare both to what we have now, faceless tinkerers who come out with the same old sound bites and clap trap and still insist some of our players can play like poor mans Premiership players.
  Then look at the two respective sides, I am sure that the past side, given everything the present side has had since a very young age in academies would be able to adjust and in nearly every case be able to play the way the modern player plays.
  The thing I question could our team at present, could they  do what they did at the time on the same pitches against the same opposition taking into account their showing against Kings Lynn and how our teams at that time took on Arsenal, Aston Villa, and Manchester City this lot would be lucky not to concede six goals against those sides if we could bring them back.
  And then the main thing, everything our present team has I know the past team could take on board and flourish, but the todays side couldn't do what they did, because that came from within, they wanted it, it hurt to fail, they were winners not wimps who lay down to Hartlepool and Sutton and Kings Lynn and most sides who show a bit of fight, they played for the team and each other, not for the next move on wherever their agent can get them, and until this side shows me a little of that the two are incomparable, one side is memorable this side in two years most will be non league, and will have to buck up and change to be good players at that level.

[i_ateallthepies]

The idea that players from different eras are in some way incomparable is flawed.  The game doesn't change so dramatically in 20 years that players are incapable of adapting.  Names already mentioned have amply demonstrated they adapt to new ideas and ways of playing the game, how else does a man like James Coppinger have a professional career of 20+ years.

Others already mentioned; McIndoe, Brown, Green as well as Copps all played two levels higher than L2, not one of our current squad would get into the team ahead of any of them.

Coppinger had a 20 year career because he adapted to the improved standard.

And I'm not necessarily saying that players improvement is the whole issue. Tactics improve. If they didn't, you'd still see teams winning titles playing W-M.

It's unarguable that defenders are far, far more comfortable on the ball than they were 20 years ago. And that opens up tactical potential that was literally unthinkable in previous times.

Like I say, go watch that Mansfield match and compare it to today's standard. 

My point is, the 2003 Rovers side playing that style of football would struggle to stay up these days. Possibly, the players would be able to step up to the higher requirements of fitness, comfortableness on the ball and quality of passing. We'll never know. They never had to do it.

My point was what has changed is the style of football and methods of training not the inherent ability of the players.  Are you actually saying that because those players 20 years ago were lumping balls upfield they weren't capable of learning to play differently?  They were playing at that level because they were the best available.  The game has evolved not the people playing it.

[Avsuptem]

In my opinion if the DRFC team of 2003 were to play today's side the current team would just about shade it and win by the odd goal. Mind you most of the 2003 side must be in their late forties / early 50's now.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The idea that players from different eras are in some way incomparable is flawed.  The game doesn't change so dramatically in 20 years that players are incapable of adapting.  Names already mentioned have amply demonstrated they adapt to new ideas and ways of playing the game, how else does a man like James Coppinger have a professional career of 20+ years.

Others already mentioned; McIndoe, Brown, Green as well as Copps all played two levels higher than L2, not one of our current squad would get into the team ahead of any of them.

Coppinger had a 20 year career because he adapted to the improved standard.

And I'm not necessarily saying that players improvement is the whole issue. Tactics improve. If they didn't, you'd still see teams winning titles playing W-M.

It's unarguable that defenders are far, far more comfortable on the ball than they were 20 years ago. And that opens up tactical potential that was literally unthinkable in previous times.

Like I say, go watch that Mansfield match and compare it to today's standard. 

My point is, the 2003 Rovers side playing that style of football would struggle to stay up these days. Possibly, the players would be able to step up to the higher requirements of fitness, comfortableness on the ball and quality of passing. We'll never know. They never had to do it.

My point was what has changed is the style of football and methods of training not the inherent ability of the players.  Are you actually saying that because those players 20 years ago were lumping balls upfield they weren't capable of learning to play differently?  They were playing at that level because they were the best available.  The game has evolved not the people playing it.

The mentality of players has changed too. We know there was a pretty heavy drinking culture around many teams 20+ years ago. Maybe that contributed to the sense of togetherness, I don't know, but it's certain that a side couldn't cope with the demands of modern football if players were regularly on the pop. Could the specific players from previous generations forego that and commit to the physical discipline required in today's game? I don't know. No-one does.

But that's all irrelevant anyway. As with so many interactions in here, the original point had been obscured. The OP asked the question of whether the standard of football (not footballers) was better 20 years ago. I'm genuinely gobsmacked that anyone could consider the information available and decide the answer to that is "yes". To me, the standard has improved so far, it's almost like a different game. If the title winning side from 03/04 played our side from last Saturday 20 times, with both putting in typical performances from their eras, I'd be amazed if the 03/04 side got more than a dozen points. Most games, they'd not be able to get hold of the ball.

[i_ateallthepies]

Ok BST, that's fair enough on the point of the question asked.  For anyone to answer that unequivocally however is subjective as neither answer can be tested to prove it.
However, the evolution of the game has been driven by those at the top of the pyramid who understand it the best and seeking to give their team an edge.

It would be reasonable to suppose that the direction the game has taken has improved the chances of success on the pitch (but in the case of playing out from the back hasn't improved the spectacle for the fans).