Historical squad comparison

[elatedscum]

The reality is, it’s very close together - we’re arguing about the cusp of the change. On one hand, John Egan probably would have been playing purely premier league football then - let’s say for West Ham. On the other hand, he’s probably more or less at that level now. I could pick a dozen premier league centre halves playing now who I prefer Egan to. Would Gary Doherty have been a spurs player - or Stephen Kelly? Not a chance - but the evolution of the league between say 1992 and 2002 was far far greater than between 2012 and 2022.

[elatedscum]

I think the first big step was the arrival of Wenger in around 1996. That really accelerated the number of international players arriving, along with general professionalism of the game etc. In Wenger’s first 12 months at the club, he signed 11 senior players: 10 foreign players and an English back-up keeper (including the likes of Viera, Overmars, Petit, Anelka). It wasn’t just European lads either, the likes of Kanu arrived a season later and that Wenger side had a number of excellent African players joining. Chelsea weren’t far behind. Liverpool’s houllier appointment signalled the same direction.

The next big one for me is, Abramovich taking over Chelsea in 2003. That money flooded down the league so fast, to West Ham, to Charlton, to Blackburn. And there was a wave of transfer inflation cause by it, which helped the lower teams. The premier league has always been uniquely equitable with it’s distribution of money, so there’s always been a far greater level of parity than in any other major league. Also, each tv deal was a milestone in and of itself.

But that era, between 2003 and 2009 was a really golden era in terms of the quality of the league. That Arsenal invincibles team were incredible. Phenomenal players. Then Mourinho’s Chelsea took took it to a whole other level. Wiped the floor with the previous points total. Barely conceded a goal. In that time, Benitez built a really good Liverpool team and United were always there or thereabouts. All of the sides, reached at least the champions league final, if they didn’t win it. The six best teams in Europe were those 4 plus Barcelona and Milan.

The emergence and re-emergence of City, PSG, Real and Bayern since then has changed the dynamics. For example, if Mbappe was born 20 years previous, he’d have signed for Arsenal - not PSG.

[elatedscum]

The effects of the Bosman ruling were still only starting to take hold, Eastern European countries were yet to accede to the EU, there was only a tiny fraction of African and Asian players playing at Premier League level as there are today, plus there are far more players from South America choosing the EPL. Plus EPL clubs now have the budgets to have huge academies with players drawn from around the globe.

The Bosman ruling was in 1995, Edgar Davids was on the move in 1996. It didn’t take 7 years to adapt.

The first Brazilians arrived at Boro, Juninho and Emerson, back in 1996. Due to the old work permit system, South American players often tended to go to Italy and Spain first. At which point they could be priced out of a move to England. That’s only changed in recent years really and it’s probably going to increase in the next 5 years as it’s easier than ever to sign a Brazilian u20 international, straight from a team in Brazil - which a decade ago was impossible unless they had an EU passport. As for asia, very few Asian players in the league now, i can only think of 4 (hwang at wolves, Mitoma at brighton, son at spurs and tomiyasu at Arsenal). There’s always been a smattering of lads from Japan, China and South Korea.

[elatedscum]

EPL clubs now have the budgets to have huge academies with players drawn from around the globe.

Slightly off topic but - RE the academies, as a Liverpool fan, I remember in the summer of 06, Liverpool signed a tonne of lads from abroad. The academy was awash with lads from Spain, Austria, Germany, Ghana, Argentina, Brazil, Finland, Sweden, Australia, Denmark, France, Hungary, Paraguay etc etc etc - far more than there are today. And I think Liverpool were probably the last of the big teams to that party - United, Arsenal and Chelsea had a tonne of young international players.

Certainly from Liverpool’s perspective - they backed off from that approach about a decade ago and currently 50 of their 60 academy players are UK born. Whereas the side that won the reserve league final in 2008 was

Gulacsi - Hungary

Darby - England
San Jose - Spain
Huth - Paraguay
Insua - Argentina

El Zhar - Morrocco
Plessis - France
Lucas - Brazil
Flynn - Scotland

Brouwjer - Netherlands
Nemeth - Hungary

Subs:
Bouzanis - Australia
Kelly - England
Simon - Hungary
Pacheco - Spain
Lindfield - England

I think there was a feeling it was easier to work within from a really early age than externally later on…

[Eirambler]

The big difference for me is the quality of teams at the top of the league, this is really squeezing the space available for middle of the road players in the Premier League. 20 years ago there was a big 2 of Arsenal and Man United, then over time it became a big 4, then a big 6. You have to be fairly exceptional to play for any of those teams as we know.

The most recent example was the buyout of Newcastle just over a year ago, that makes it effectively a big seven now. There you went from a situation where you had two middle of the road Irish players - Hendrick and Clark - getting decent Premier League minutes to them basically being bombed out of the league overnight. Whereas 20 years ago there were maybe 16 or 17 teams a non-exceptional player could hope to sign for, that's down to 13 now - and three of those 13 are getting relegated every year. So it's a lot harder to build a steady Premier League career unless you're a top class player, there just isn't enough space there to accommodate solid pros like there used to be.

Like it or not, none of the "big seven" are going to sign John Egan. So the space available for him to play in the Premier League is squeezed and he finds himself having to do two years in the Championship at the peak of his career.

[Supreme feet]

If I was picking players for my five-a-side team, and I had the choice of present-day Egan, O'Shea, Molumby and Cullen, or the 2002 versions of Breen, Cunningham, Holland and Kinsella, I'd choose the former four all day long, purely on the basis of the superior technical and tactical coaching that modern players get, and the much better standard of physical conditioning. But that's not unique to Ireland. Camavinga, Kante and Tchouameni are all physical and technical powerhouses compared to the likes of Deschamps, Boghossian and Petit.

In 2000-02, the four I've named were all experienced and battle-hardened from playing several seasons of Premier League football, often as captains, which gave much better preparation for the intensity of international football. Even the relegated teams in 2002 had players like Finidi George, Georgi Kinkladze, Muzzy Izzet, Dennis Wise and Fabrizio Ravanelli. Holland, Kinsella, etc, were testing themselves against seasoned internationals every week.

Whereas these days, the likes of O'Shea and Molumby have to raise and alter their game to get to the pitch of international football, as the style of play in the Championship, for all its riches, can range from comically loose, open, and defensively naive (see Connolly's goals yesterday) to putrid, one-dimensional hoofball. Which is why it's often good craic to watch, but definitely not where I'd like the majority of our players to be playing.

[John83]

...Holland and Kinsella were workmanlike but not much more...

Holland was the beating heart of an Ipswich side that finished sixth immediately after promotion. They only fell back once teams learned to put two players on Holland. He's head and shoulders ahead of every midfielder we have now. Add to that, he was nigh indestructable: he went years between missing a game to injury. Kinsella... maybe Cullen's at his level. Maybe.

People underestimated those two because they weren't Roy Keane.

[seanfhear]

Holland was the beating heart of an Ipswich side that finished sixth immediately after promotion. They only fell back once teams learned to put two players on Holland. He's head and shoulders ahead of every midfielder we have now. Add to that, he was nigh indestructable: he went years between missing a game to injury. Kinsella... maybe Cullen's at his level. Maybe.

People underestimated those two because they weren't Roy Keane.

I always like Holland and Kinsella ~ ~ Ya never doubted that they were giving it their best ~ ~ Different times maybe.

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Holland was the beating heart of an Ipswich side that finished sixth immediately after promotion. They only fell back once teams learned to put two players on Holland. He's head and shoulders ahead of every midfielder we have now. Add to that, he was nigh indestructable: he went years between missing a game to injury. Kinsella... maybe Cullen's at his level. Maybe.

People underestimated those two because they weren't Roy Keane.

Probably some truth in that. I remember Holland as a solid midfielder but could be anonymous in games. Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly. Kinsella was limited from my memory. They would probably get into our current side because midfield is a section we're light on. We've got hopes for Molumby, Knight and a few others like that. They have the potential to be better than the 02 midfield.

[tetsujin1979]

It looks like the best from the current squad would be competing with numbers 15-23 on the 2002 squad

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

It looks like the best from the current squad would be competing with numbers 15-23 on the 2002 squad

Not sure, I think the general consensus appears to be that our current centre backs would be starting and Cullen would be in midfield. Given, Duff and Keane certain starters and it looks like Finnan would be selected ahead of present day Coleman. Then there's debate over the other positions. Harte or Doherty or maybe Kelly or Doherty for the right midfield position. Not many comments on the McClean v Kilbane issue. I really think they have so many similarities that it's a 50/50.

That's a minimum of 3 starters with debate over 2 more for the current squad.

[dr_peepee]

Consensus?

And Kilbane over McClean.

[BOOMSHAKALAKA]

Consensus?

And Kilbane over McClean.

Yeah, I think it was only you who said they'd pick Breen and Staunton. Everyone else was saying our current centre backs as far as I remember.

Kilbane 110 games and 8 goals, McClean 96 games 11 goals. Both tried to use their speed to knock the ball past defenders and cross it in but both also lacked elite technique. Limited in many ways but ultra professional, loyal and as committed as any players we've ever had. It's the definition of a 50/50 in my book but maybe others don't see it the same.

[seanfhear]

Consensus?

And Kilbane over McClean.

Kilbane for me ~ ~ He played at much higher level with Everton ( and even at some of his other clubs ) than McClean and was a better player for Ireland as well. Played winger / midfielder and a little at left back ( not his best position ) ~ ~ Kilbane's best was much better than McCleans best.

[third policeman]

Yeah, I think it was only you who said they'd pick Breen and Staunton. Everyone else was saying our current centre backs as far as I remember.

Kilbane 110 games and 8 goals, McClean 96 games 11 goals. Both tried to use their speed to knock the ball past defenders and cross it in but both also lacked elite technique. Limited in many ways but ultra professional, loyal and as committed as any players we've ever had. It's the definition of a 50/50 in my book but maybe others don't see it the same.

Kilbane had way more ability and football intelligence than McClean. Played an outstanding game in centre mid alongside Keane against France at Stade de France during the Kerr era. Kilbane played virtually his entire career in the PL and notwithstanding the improvement in quality, I genuinely don’t think McClean would have got into that Everton team at that time. He’s a totally honest and committed to the cause pro, but McClean is lucky to have been around at a time when we have had one of the weakest group of players in half a century.

[samhaydenjr]

The Bosman ruling was in 1995, Edgar Davids was on the move in 1996. It didn’t take 7 years to adapt.

The first Brazilians arrived at Boro, Juninho and Emerson, back in 1996. Due to the old work permit system, South American players often tended to go to Italy and Spain first. At which point they could be priced out of a move to England. That’s only changed in recent years really and it’s probably going to increase in the next 5 years as it’s easier than ever to sign a Brazilian u20 international, straight from a team in Brazil - which a decade ago was impossible unless they had an EU passport. As for asia, very few Asian players in the league now, i can only think of 4 (hwang at wolves, Mitoma at brighton, son at spurs and tomiyasu at Arsenal). There’s always been a smattering of lads from Japan, China and South Korea.

Haven't had a chance to look at full squads yet (might be a little too much work!) but just looking at club captains as a potential indicator of change, in 2001/02, three of the club captains were not British or Irish (three were Irish), whereas nine of the club captains this season are, Seamus Coleman being the only Irish member of that group

[John83]

On Kilbane vs McClean, there's not much between their peaks, but 2002 Kilbane was at his peak at 25 years old, and 2023 McClean is coming to the end: he'll turn 34 in April.

[tetsujin1979]

Also Kilbane had a much longer time at his peak, and adapted his game to play in multiple positions

[seanfhear]

Also Kilbane had a much longer time at his peak, and adapted his game to play in multiple positions

Kilbane , better all round player with some weakness alright.

[nigel-harps1954]

Kilbane at his peak was well above McClean at his.