Best Feeder Leagues In The Last Decade

[Mpache]

1 minute ago, Spike said:

If it was the best they wouldn't leave.

It was until the 1980's. Just look at the intercontinental trophy count, the fact every Brazilian played in Brazil when they won 3 World Cups, etc. 

I made a post about this a while back in the TF365 Top 10 thread. And the players leaving was so few and far between. It was mostly Peruvians/Chileans that went and I'd guess that was because those clubs were never financially strong, even at a time when football wasn't won with money.

I can count the amount of South American's playing in Champions League finals on one hand between 1960 and 1980. Small sample size but Argentinians and Brazilians really didn't need to leave. And the spots were usually preferred to other Europeans.

[Spike]

Just now, Inti Brian said:

It was until the 1980's. Just look at the intercontinental trophy count, the fact every Brazilian played in Brazil when they won 3 World Cups, etc. 

I made a post about this a while back in the TF365 Top 10 thread. And the players leaving was so few and far between. It was mostly Peruvians/Chileans that went and I'd guess that was because those clubs were never financially strong, even at a time when football wasn't won with money.

I can count the amount of South American's playing in Champions League finals on one hand between 1960 and 1980. Small sample size but Argentinians and Brazilians really didn't need to leave. And the spots were usually preferred to other Europeans.

And yet still more South Americans moved to Euopre than vice versa. National team performance isn't indicative of league quality, there are far too many factors that affect both to make it causality.

 

[Mpache]

@Spike

If you look at the intercontinental cups won between Europe and South America, it's 24 SA and 23 Europe. Between 1960 and 1980, 11 for South America, 8 for Europe. Not only that but 6 World Cups for us, 5 for Europe.

Also if you look at the World Cup squads (which is more related to the point we're discussing) you will see that pretty much every player played in their domestic league. Not just in South America either. You saw a few exceptions. Argentina had a few players abroad in 1974, but 1978 it went back to 99% playing in Argentina. Brazil didn't have a single player abroad in a World Cup squad until 1982. Actually, 1982 was the turning point for many which is why I see that as the decade football started to become more corporate and about money. If you look at the World Cup squads between 1978 and 1982, you will notice more players have begun moving abroad. Slowly but surely. Something that would continue to evolve over time.

[Mpache]

Just now, Spike said:

And yet still more South Americans moved to Euopre than vice versa. National team performance isn't indicative of league quality, there are far too many factors that affect both to make it causality.

 

And tell me why would Europeans need to move to South America?

Europe has always lived in it's own bubble. It says a lot that even back then South Americans would follow European football (of what they could have done anyways) and South American football, but Europeans would never respect our continent.

In fact, we're not entirely blameless. Brazil has always lived in it's own bubble and they still do to an extent. Why do you think Brazilians were the ones that moved the least? Not only that but Europe is more developed than most to all of South America. The only appealing places to live there back then was Argentina and Venezuela. The former was as developed as most western European countries, where as the latter wasn't quite that but it was one of the dream destinations in South America. Only thing is they preferred baseball.

Chile and Peru were the other 2 countries that were strong at football in the 60's and 70's, and they were in genuine crisis. Chile was not the developed country that it is today and Peru was way worse than it is today. Imagine that.

Colombia, Ecuador and Bolivia were pretty terrible at football and Paraguay has always been quite undeveloped.

It's not really a head scratcher as to why Europeans didn't go to South America. The trophies speak for themselves though. 

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

@Spike

If you look at the intercontinental cups won between Europe and South America, it's 24 SA and 23 Europe. Between 1960 and 1980, 11 for South America, 8 for Europe. Not only that but 6 World Cups for us, 5 for Europe.

Also if you look at the World Cup squads (which is more related to the point we're discussing) you will see that pretty much every player played in their domestic league. Not just in South America either. You saw a few exceptions. Argentina had a few players abroad in 1974, but 1978 it went back to 99% playing in Argentina. Brazil didn't have a single player abroad in a World Cup squad until 1982. Actually, 1982 was the turning point for many which is why I see that as the decade football started to become more corporate and about money. If you look at the World Cup squads between 1978 and 1982, you will notice more players have begun moving abroad. Slowly but surely. Something that would continue to evolve over time.

There is no direct correlation between league quality and national team ability. The league could be fucking balls and have 11 really good players spread between 20 teams that play like farmers. It just prvoes which teams were better, not leagues. This has nothing to do with the abilities of national teams, the fact is Sudacas left for Europe, starting whenever the fuck in the 50s and have kept flocking over ever since at a faster rate.

Also 'us' 

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

And tell me why would Europeans need to move to South America?

Europe has always lived in it's own bubble. It says a lot that even back then South Americans would follow European football (of what they could have done anyways) and South American football, but Europeans would never respect our continent.

In fact, we're not entirely blameless. Brazil has always lived in it's own bubble and they still do to an extent. Why do you think Brazilians were the ones that moved the least? Not only that but Europe is more developed than most to all of South America. The only appealing places to live there back then was Argentina and Venezuela. The former was as developed as most western European countries, where as the latter wasn't quite that but it was one of the dream destinations in South America. Only thing is they preferred baseball.

Chile and Peru were the other 2 countries that were strong at football in the 60's and 70's, and they were in genuine crisis. Chile was not the developed country that it is today and Peru was way worse than it is today. Imagine that.

Colombia, Ecuador and Bolivia were pretty terrible at football and Paraguay has always been quite undeveloped.

It's not really a head scratcher as to why Europeans didn't go to South America. The trophies speak for themselves though. 

They wouldn't because the leagues are shit, ergo why Sudacas leave for Europe.

[Mpache]

1 minute ago, Spike said:

There is no direct correlation between league quality and national team ability. The league could be fucking balls and have 11 really good players spread between 20 teams that play like farmers. It just prvoes which teams were better, not leagues. This has nothing to do with the abilities of national teams, the fact is Sudacas left for Europe, starting whenever the fuck in the 50s and have kept flocking over ever since at a faster rate.

Also 'us' 

They didn't though.

You keep saying they did and it was very rare for a South American to leave. All you have to do is take a look at squads back then and you'll see they didn't. If they did, it was usually outsiders or fringe South American countries (like Peru and Chile)

Intercontinental cups last time I checked was club football, and get this, South America had more between the start of the Champions League/Libertadores era until 1980, where money started to kick in with sport.

Also get this: Brazil didn't have a single player in their squads until 1982 playing outside of Brazil. Surely you're not suggesting Brazil won 3 World Cups with weaker squads no?

[Mpache]

3 minutes ago, Spike said:

They wouldn't because the leagues are shit, ergo why Sudacas leave for Europe.

Yeah, I mean you can have an opinion but it's a pretty tragic one when South American sides shat on Europeans. At club and international level.

[Mpache]

Carlos Cazsely (Chile's best player), Teofilo Cubillas (Peru's best player) and Mario Kempes (Argentina's best player) all played in Europe at some point. Is that what you wanted to hear? 

The rest played in South America.

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

They didn't though.

You keep saying they did and it was very rare for a South American to leave. All you have to do is take a look at squads back then and you'll see they didn't. If they did, it was usually outsiders or fringe South American countries (like Peru and Chile)

Intercontinental cups last time I checked was club football, and get this, South America had more between the start of the Champions League/Libertadores era until 1980, where money started to kick in with sport.

Also get this: Brazil didn't have a single player in their squads until 1982 playing outside of Brazil. Surely you're not suggesting Brazil won 3 World Cups with weaker squads no?

So they did then? If they didn't at all, it can't be rare because it doesn't exist. If it does exist (which it does) it happened.

League strength =/= national team strength. Such a bizarre argument. Ah yes we have 20 really good players, that must mean that alll 20000 players in the league are great as well, making our league stronk

2 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

Yeah, I mean you can have an opinion but it's a pretty tragic one when South American sides shat on Europeans. At club and international level.

You keep banging on about national teams when this is about leagues  I wasn't aware the Brazilian national team played together in the Brasilian league.

[Spike]

Just now, Inti Brian said:

Carlos Cazsely (Chile's best player), Teofilo Cubillas (Peru's best player) and Mario Kempes (Argentina's best player) all played in Europe at some point. Is that what you wanted to hear? 

The rest played in South America.

Alfredo di Stefano played in Europe. Must be the more difficult leagues bringing up their game.

[Mpache]

Just now, Spike said:

So they did then? If they didn't at all, it can't be rare because it doesn't exist. If it does exist (which it does) it happened.

League strength =/= national team strength. Such a bizarre argument. Ah yes we have 20 really good players, that must mean that alll 20000 players in the league are great as well, making our league stronk

You keep banging on about national teams when this is about leagues  I wasn't aware the Brazilian national team played together in the Brasilian league.

I love how you're going on about a point I busted a while ago.

Read this

5 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

Intercontinental cups last time I checked was club football, and get this, South America had more between the start of the Champions League/Libertadores era until 1980, where money started to kick in with sport.

Also this

5 minutes ago, Inti Brian said:

Also get this: Brazil didn't have a single player in their squads until 1982 playing outside of Brazil. Surely you're not suggesting Brazil won 3 World Cups with weaker squads no?

If Brazil's best players played in Europe, why did they not call them up for World Cups? 

[Mpache]

1 minute ago, Spike said:

Alfredo di Stefano played in Europe. Must be the more difficult leagues bringing up their game.

Yes, he's an example. How many others can you bring up?

Last time I checked, national teams are the best players of said countries. If all of them played in their own league and then they won their world cup, then their clubs must have been pretty fucking strong. And I'm not guessing. My dad and uncle grew up with South American leagues and they both told me it was very high standard. And again, just look at their trophy wins both at club and international. It's superior. End of. It was a rare occasion for a player to go to Europe. There are few examples of players who actually made an impact. At least until Ozzie Ardiles joined Tottenham.

[Spike]

Just now, Inti Brian said:

I love how you're going on about a point I busted a while ago.

Read this

Also this

If Brazil's best players played in Europe, why did they not call them up for World Cups? 

Weak teams win cups all the time, that is the nature of cups. The only way to measure it would be a mixed league, which didn’t happen so your point has no value.

I never said Brazils best players played in Yurope, ya spazz, that doesn’t mean they had a good league

[Mpache]

Just now, Spike said:

Weak teams win cups all the time, that is the nature of cups. The only way to measure it would be a mixed league, which didn’t happen so your point has no value.

I could literally use the same argument for Europe...

You're saying "there is no way to judge" and then you say shit like this

17 minutes ago, Spike said:

They wouldn't because the leagues are shit, ergo why Sudacas leave for Europe.

And also this

3 minutes ago, Spike said:

that doesn’t mean they had a good league

And you have no proof to back it up. I'm still waiting for more examples of good South Americans that left for Europe besides the 3 I mentioned and Di Stefano. 

Also

4 minutes ago, Spike said:

I never said Brazils best players played in Yurope, ya spazz, that doesn’t mean they had a good league

Well, if Brazil's best players all played in Brazil, and teams like Santos won the intercontinental cup on a regular basis (by some landslide of scorelines too), fundamentally it means they DID have a good league.

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

Yes, he's an example. How many others can you bring up?

Last time I checked, national teams are the best players of said countries. If all of them played in their own league and then they won their world cup, then their clubs must have been pretty fucking strong. And I'm not guessing. My dad and uncle grew up with South American leagues and they both told me it was very high standard. And again, just look at their trophy wins both at club and international. It's superior. End of. It was a rare occasion for a player to go to Europe. There are few examples of players who actually made an impact. At least until Ozzie Ardiles joined Tottenham.

Jair is another, won the wc with inter

south america was shit and when international flights became cheap and safe everyone decided to ditch the zero and get with the hero. 

 

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

I could literally use the same argument for Europe...

You're saying "there is no way to judge" and then you say shit like this

And also this

And you have no proof to back it up. I'm still waiting for more examples of good South Americans that left for Europe besides the 3 I mentioned and Di Stefano. 

Also

Well, if Brazil's best players all played in Brazil, and teams like Santos won the intercontinental cup on a regular basis (by some landslide of scorelines too), fundamentally it means they DID have a good league.

on good team doesn’t make a good league, you have no proof either besides creating your own barometres

[Mpache]

Hell I'm going to bring @Berserker proud River fan into this.

It's not the first time Spike has spoken shite about South America.

watch this be my end 

[Spike]

imagine basing an argument on conjecture and then claiming someone has no proof - a nightmare of epic proportions from brian

[Mpache]

Just now, Spike said:

on good team doesn’t make a good league, you have no proof either besides creating your own barometres

What about Botafogo with Garrincha?

Or Flamengo with Zico (who smashed Dalglish's Liverpool 3-0)

Or Tostao's Cruzeiro

Yeah "oNe tEaM"

This is top level wumming but I'll keep biting because this is just bollocks.

[Spike]

Just now, Inti Brian said:

Hell I'm going to bring @Berserker proud River fan into this.

It's not the first time Spike has spoken shite about South America.

watch this be my end 

Berserker is a good lad and intelligent so I imagine he disagrees with you

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Inti Brian said:

What about Botafogo with Garrincha?

Or Flamengo with Zico (who smashed Dalglish's Liverpool 3-0)

Or Tostao's Cruzeiro

Yeah "oNe tEaM"

This is top level wumming but I'll keep biting because this is just bollocks.

ah yes garrincha’s botofoga time travelling and dueling with zicos 70s team for the title

[Mpache]

Must say this is a masterclass of wumming and I fell for it but fuck it, all worth it. 

Can't wait to wake up and hear more Euro centric shite from the others. Always a new baseless argument to not lose.

[Spike]

you cannot enter a thunderdome with the warrior like me, you will be broken like baby

[Spike]

Just now, Inti Brian said:

Must say this is a masterclass of wumming and I fell for it but fuck it, all worth it. 

Can't wait to wake up and hear more Euro centric shite from the others. Always a new baseless argument to not lose.

if you were a base jumper you’d never leave the ground