Are "Controllers" overrated?

by Gil Tue Sep 17, 2013 3:55 pm

Because their value has never been higher ever since Barca's 2-3 year dominance.

Their importance seems to have been inflated ever since this period while the worth of an attacking midfielder seems to decrease each passing year.

People seem to use the "he can't control a game" criticism against players of the attacking midfield ilk while the "he doesn't score enough goals or create enough" never seems to apply to deep lying playmakers.

So in short, which type of midfielder is more valuable to a team? The trequartista or the regista?

by Luca Tue Sep 17, 2013 3:58 pm

It's long been a trait- before Barcelona in 2009- over central midfielders ability to control the pace of the game.

The regista is more valuable because he's the link between the defense, midfield and attack. The trequartista is the link between the midfield and attack. As far as controlling its regista, more touches, more influence on that aspect but a trequartista can be just as impactful with half the touches, with that impact always towards goal.

by jibers Tue Sep 17, 2013 4:03 pm

Trequartistas don't really exist anymore Gil so I don't know wtf you are on about.... Why would a deep lying playmaker need to score goals when he iss further away from goals and most registas are sitting in front of defences as well. Use your head ffs.

AMs are closer to goal so they are more likely to be judged on GS ability. Who said AMs have to control games as well? Never heard that before. I think you just made this thread to throw the two words trequartista and regista around because you're question makes no sense. Who is more important, a goal keeper or a striker....

it depends on the team and the roles.

by Mr Nick09 Tue Sep 17, 2013 4:06 pm

what's overrated are the bad copies of registas and trequartistas out there. The players that can play those roles to a T come few and far in between, but when they do, they dominate. The rest of the time, you have guys like Lampard who are great but not special.

by Gil Tue Sep 17, 2013 4:37 pm

My point is which players have the most impact on a team?

If you were just appointed manager of Sampdoria and you were given a choice between a 20 year old Fabregas or Busquets by the owner. Which type of player would you prefer?

by cyberman Tue Sep 17, 2013 4:40 pm

Utd had Scholes and Carrick in MF long before Barcas dominance.

by TonyDaBeast Tue Sep 17, 2013 4:54 pm

Milan's midfield in the early to late 2000s..

and to answer ur question gil i would take fabregas, just because thats my style of team. but to each his own

by Art Morte Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:09 pm

ffs I hate it when people use these Italian words to describe positions... Either write your whole damn message in Italian or stick to English, thanks!

On topic: depends on many factors, the players and system the team has.

by Onyx Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:11 pm

I'd go with Fabregas. Busquets isn't really a regista, his primary role is to be a DM, however he's a decent passer. A team could be built around Fabregas. He offers more than Busquets.

by Pedram Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:40 pm

Art Morte wrote:ffs I hate it when people use these Italian words to describe positions... Either write your whole damn message in Italian or stick to English, thanks!

Hipsters.

by BarrileteCosmico Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:23 pm

Art Morte wrote:ffs I hate it when people use these Italian words to describe positions... Either write your whole damn message in Italian or stick to English, thanks!

On topic: depends on many factors, the players and system the team has.

Regista: deep lying playmaker
TQ: AM without defensive responsibilities, perhaps due to them being too lazy (no wonder they no longer exist)

Not that hard to remember honestly.

Can't think of that many "controllers" that are rated way more highly than TQs/AMs/F9s. Can I get some examples Gil? If anything I think they're rated the same as always relative to the more advance position.

by Kaladin Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:54 pm

TQ is the best role, you all suck

by Swanhends Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:57 pm

Seems to me that quality AMs are much easier to find than quality CMs, so I'd choose the latter

by DuringTheWar Tue Sep 17, 2013 7:37 pm

hehe, its true Italian terminology has been adopted by hipsters and sometimes get annoying. But, Italian language has more comprehensive and specific descriptions for football than the English language has done

by chinomaster182 Tue Sep 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Gil wrote:My point is which players have the most impact on a team?

If you were just appointed manager of Sampdoria and you were given a choice between a 20 year old Fabregas or Busquets by the owner. Which type of player would you prefer?

First of all, no they are not overrated.

In answer to your second question, it depends on what kind of team you have, the players at your disposal and the kind of style/tactics you want to enforce.

For faster, more direct teams a quality AM can be a big help.

For slower, more controlling teams a CM is best.

It also depends on how many midfielders you want to play and how you align them, just one holding midfielder with two other indirect players? Busquet is king in that system. Two holding midfielders and one more atacking one? That has been the system most legendary AMs have performed in.

I also think (and Cruyff would agree) that an outstanding CM will do you little good if you don't have the other players around him to play that kind of technical football, while many AMs seem to still have a big influence in so-so teams (see Argentina, latin america).

Some teams do both at the same time (United with Carrick and Kagawa) and some do none at times (Madrid with Alonso and Khedira).

by Art Morte Tue Sep 17, 2013 8:42 pm

BarrileteCosmico wrote:
Art Morte wrote:ffs I hate it when people use these Italian words to describe positions... Either write your whole damn message in Italian or stick to English, thanks!

On topic: depends on many factors, the players and system the team has.
Regista: deep lying playmaker
TQ: AM without defensive responsibilities, perhaps due to them being too lazy (no wonder they no longer exist)

Not that hard to remember honestly.

So we're able to talk about football perfectly fine in English, but not able to describe a deep lying midfielder or a traditional number 10 in English? Get out. Damn ridiculous that people want to throw these Italian words around.

by lenear1030 Tue Sep 17, 2013 9:05 pm

chinomaster182 wrote:
Some teams do both at the same time (United with Carrick and Kagawa) and some do none at times (Madrid with Alonso and Khedira).

Only Kagawa doesn't play for United. Well he does, he just doesn't play...

by jibers Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:35 am

Busquets is a regista now? WTF am I reading?

by The Franchise Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:50 am

Gil wrote:My point is which players have the most impact on a team?

Surely this 100% depends on what style of ball you play?

If you play counter with deep lines and quick transitions, you need a passer with range and speed and mobility in the final third.

You trying to force the opponent back with possession, you need at least one player who is trusted in possession, in tight areas to play passes. Really more than 1, but you understand.

Some teams mix it up and play differently depending on the opponent, others dont really have a style, others play with a mixture of different things..but using the two extremes I first used, I think again, it surely depends on how your trying to play.

by BarrileteCosmico Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:54 am

Art Morte wrote:So we're able to talk about football perfectly fine in English, but not able to describe a deep lying midfielder or a traditional number 10 in English? Get out. Damn ridiculous that people want to throw these Italian words around.

But why type deep-lying playmaker when you can go for the shorter, more elegant solution in regista? I don't think expecting users to be up to date on some of the more common football vocab at a football forum is too much. It's not like we're a community of casual watchers. Besides there are only a few Italian words that make it to the forum: regista, trequartista and to a lesser extent fantasista.

You can always refer to this thread for definitions if you have any questions: http://www.goallegacy.net/t32352-italian-terminology

by McAgger Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:00 am

Best example for a regista atm is obviously Pirlo. GTFO with these Bisquit regista crap.

by Blue Barrett Wed Sep 18, 2013 3:21 am

Art Morte wrote:
BarrileteCosmico wrote:
Art Morte wrote:ffs I hate it when people use these Italian words to describe positions... Either write your whole damn message in Italian or stick to English, thanks!

On topic: depends on many factors, the players and system the team has.
Regista: deep lying playmaker
TQ: AM without defensive responsibilities, perhaps due to them being too lazy (no wonder they no longer exist)

Not that hard to remember honestly.
So we're able to talk about football perfectly fine in English, but not able to describe a deep lying midfielder or a traditional number 10 in English? Get out. Damn ridiculous that people want to throw these Italian words around.

by Blue Barrett Wed Sep 18, 2013 3:23 am

BarrileteCosmico wrote:
Art Morte wrote:So we're able to talk about football perfectly fine in English, but not able to describe a deep lying midfielder or a traditional number 10 in English? Get out. Damn ridiculous that people want to throw these Italian words around.
But why type deep-lying playmaker when you can go for the shorter, more elegant solution in regista? I don't think expecting users to be up to date on some of the more common football vocab at a football forum is too much. It's not like we're a community of casual watchers. Besides there are only a few Italian words that make it to the forum: regista, trequartista and to a lesser extent fantasista.

You can always refer to this thread for definitions if you have any questions: http://www.goallegacy.net/t32352-italian-terminology

So why Italian? Why not German? Or Spanish? Or French?

by BarrileteCosmico Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:55 am

No reason other than that they're not widely used. If there were a German word for a position that half the forum started using then I would happily learn it and incorporate it to my football vocab.

by windkick Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:39 am

How about English since it's a English forum?

My first language is Spanish, my I should start writing in Spanish with a link at the end for Spanish terminology when I could of just wrote it in a langue everyone understands here

Smile

by Sponsored content

Are "Controllers" overrated?

Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?

Re: Are "Controllers" overrated?