Teams of the Decade - 2000's

Paully D

From Zonal Marking (one the best sites around, by the way). If you follow the link and click into each team there's a much more detailed description of each, including analysis of their formations, players etc. It's a really great read.

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/03/28/zonal-markings-20-teams-of-the-decade-in-full/

Zonal Marking’s 20 teams of the decade – in full

March 28, 2010

After twenty trips down memory lane, this series has finally come to an end. Below are the twenty sides chosen, in descending order, to represent the 2000s in tactical terms.

Choosing the sides was a difficult task. The intention was not to choose the twenty ‘best’ sides, but to choose twenty sides who were somehow interesting tactically, or those who made a significant impact upon the game.

The France side of Euro 2004, the Australia side of World Cup 2006 or the Bologna side of 2001/02 will hardly go down as great sides, but were fascinating to study from a tactical point of view. The order is subjective and not based upon any strict criteria, but hopefully the detail about each individual side will cause more interest than the order itself.

A few interesting things come out of it – how few three-man defences there are, how few 4-4-2s there are, how three of the top five sides occasionally played strikerless shapes, that Cafu, Gilberto, Thierry Henry, Lucio and Daniel Alves all feature in three sides on the list.

There are other successful sides not on the list – Italy’s World Cup-winning side, Inter’s successful side of the second half of the decade, and a couple of Bayern Munich sides. The list could also rightfully be seen as focusing too narrowly on Western Europe and international tournaments, as fans of the Boca Juniors side of 2003/04, or the recent Shakhtar Donetsk side would point out.

But hopefully this has been an interesting feature – attention now turns to the great sides of the 2010s…

20) Sevilla, 2005-07: For winning the UEFA Cup twice in succession, showing that a traditional 4-4-2 can still work at the highest level when adapted to suit the players at hand.

19) France, Euro 2004: For trying an innovative shape, but ultimately demonstrating that football isn’t about trying to cram your best players into the same team.

18) Australia, World Cup 2006: For outlining the value of packing the midfield by playing a 3-6-1 shape, and dominating possession against better sides.

17) Bologna, 2001/02: For showing how successful a ‘big man holding the ball up’ can be, and for varying their formation but keeping the same tactics.

16) Senegal, World Cup 2002: For shocking the world with their victory over France, and for playing physical but technically excellent counter-attacking football.

15) Brazil, 2007-09: For playing a fascinating 4-2-3-1 / 4-4-2 diamond / 4-2-2-2 shape, and providing one of the most interesting tactical debates of modern times.

14) Milan, 2002-07: For their two Champions League victories, and for playing up to four talented playmakers in the same midfield by reintroducing the deep-lying playmaker

13) Chelsea, 2004-06: For taking the Premiership by storm and showing how successful the 4-3-3 shape can be by occupying opposition full-backs.

12) Brazil World Cup 2002: For winning the World Cup by playing adventurous football despite fielding seven relatively defensive players in an unusual 3-4-3 shape.

11) Valencia, 2001-04: For winning La Liga twice and the UEFA Cup, and establishing the 4-2-3-1 as a creditable formation.

10) Roma, 2000/01: For demonstrating how successful a three-man defence can be, and for providing a great debate between two players upfront.

9) Arsenal, 2001-04: For two incredible title victories by playing wonderful football in a loose 4-4-2 that became a 4-2-3-1.

8) Czech Republic, Euro 2004: For having more attacking options within the first XI than any other side in the decade.

7) Spain, Euro 2008: For playing their way to success through tiki-taka.

6) Bayer Leverkusen, 2001/02: For coming so close to three trophies and setting the agenda for how European football tactics would evolve throughout the decade.

5) Roma, 2005-07: For hinting at the future of football – strikerless formations.

4) Porto, 2002-04: For achieving the most remarkable club feat of the decade – coming from nowhere to win the Champions League.

3) Manchester United, 2006-09: For an astonishing run of trophies, and for playing different systems and utilising their players so well.

2) Barcelona, 2008/09: For winning every tournament they entered, for playing incredible football, and for being flexible at both ends of the pitch.

1) Greece, Euro 2004: For the biggest shock in the history of football.

G.K.

Read these several times each - great section and site.

eagle eye

Zonalmarking is a brilliant site and I visit it almost daily.

This ranking thing is awful though. Why is it that when people are really, really good at something that they want to spread their wings to areas where they are not so good?

G.K.

eagle eye wrote: »

Zonalmarking is a brilliant site and I visit it almost daily.

This ranking thing is awful though. Why is it that when people are really, really good at something that they want to spread their wings to areas where they are not so good?

likewise

PhlegmyMoses

It's interesting that Spaletti's Roma are there, nice to see. Fergie played magpie with that formation and so did a few others.

kevohmsford

What about the Liverpool team from 2000-2001. They did really well to win 3 trophies that season.

RiseToTheTop

What about the Madrid than won the 00 and 02 Champions League? Zidane in the 2nd team.

Nuri Sahin

20) Sevilla, 2005-07: For winning the UEFA Cup twice in succession, showing that a traditional 4-4-2 can still work at the highest level when adapted to suit the players at hand.

11) Valencia, 2001-04: For winning La Liga twice and the UEFA Cup, and establishing the 4-2-3-1 as a creditable formation.

10) Roma, 2000/01: For demonstrating how successful a three-man defence can be, and for providing a great debate between two players upfront.

Absolutely loved watching these 3 teams play during their dominant spells in the last decade, especially the two Spanish sides. Shame Sevilla didn't go on and win the league in 06/07. Played the best football in Europe that season for me, just ran out of steam towards the end.

jaykay74

kevohmsford wrote: »

What about the Liverpool team from 2000-2001. They did really well to win 3 trophies that season.

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

What about the Madrid than won the 00 and 02 Champions League? Zidane in the 2nd team.

.

The intention was not to choose the twenty ‘best’ sides, but to choose twenty sides who were somehow interesting tactically, or those who made a significant impact upon the game.

#15

In before the shítstorm

ZonalMarking wrote:

The intention was not to choose the twenty ‘best’ sides, but to choose twenty sides who were somehow interesting tactically, or those who made a significant impact upon the game.

He did a pretty good job, considering the criteria he set for himself.

#15

Mourinho seems to be the only coach that's in there twice (maybe I'm wrong).

Incredible to think of all he has done over the last decade.

kitakyushu

Speaking of Mourinho, I'd have put Inter 2010 in there too. Won the CL. Plus, their performance in the 2nd leg v Barca was nothing short of remarkable (10 v 11 for more than 60mins).

Fuhrer

kitakyushu wrote: »

Speaking of Mourinho, I'd have put Inter 2010 in there too. Won the CL. Plus, their performance in the 2nd leg v Barca was nothing short of remarkable (10 v 11 for more than 60mins).

Yeah but there was nothing really special about that, the other teams were chosen for doing something unique like a new playing style or being massive underdogs

kitakyushu

Fuhrer wrote: »

Yeah but there was nothing really special about that, the other teams were chosen for doing something unique like a new playing style or being massive underdogs

Fair enough, tho it should be said that by the end of the game they were playing 6-3-0 (which was a new formation to me anyway).

redzerdrog

Id have had the Napoli team of the past couple of seasons in there somewhere

Neil3030

I'd have Stoke in there.

K-9

If it was more international Bielsa would win surely?

Samich

Neil3030 wrote: »

I'd have Stoke in there.

If stoke didn't have Rory Delap they wouldn't be that much different to many other teams.

AgileMyth

Samich wrote: »

If stoke didn't have Rory Delap they wouldn't be that much different to many other teams.

Tony Pulis took a nothing team up from the championship and established them as a top half premier league team using the players he had and the ones he could sign, based on his limited budget, to the absolute best of their ability.

What exactly did Delap achieve prior to his time with Pulis at Stoke?

willmunny1990

Samich wrote: »

If stoke didn't have Rory Delap they wouldn't be that much different to many other teams.

What a terrible post.

Washington Irving

AgileMyth wrote: »

Tony Pulis took a nothing team up from the championship and established them as a top half premier league team using the players he had and the ones he could sign, based on his limited budget, to the absolute best of their ability.

What exactly did Delap achieve prior to his time with Pulis at Stoke?

According to this post, Stoke have been the fifth highest spenders in the PL, only behind Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool and Sunderland.
Credit to Pulis for getting them into the Premier League but there certainly hasn't been a lack of funding since

AgileMyth

Saul-Goode9 wrote: »

According to this post, Stoke have been the fifth highest spenders in the PL, only behind Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool and Sunderland.
Credit to Pulis for getting them into the Premier League but there certainly hasn't been a lack of funding since

Since being a key word there. Their spending has improved as their league position has. They've performed above themselves and earned the right to continue doing so.

Xavi6

Zonal Marking is the very definition of a hipster webiste, i.e. it's cool to like it and say it's great when actually it very often just states the obvious. If any with decent knowledge had hours upon to sit down and watch games four times they'd come up with the same conclusions.

Anyway, on topic, the list is decent but agree that Bielsa's Chile needs to be in there.

Adolf Hipster

Would have dortmund from last year in there aswell, magnificent team to watch with Sahin pulling the strings.

Washington Irving

AgileMyth wrote: »

Since being a key word there. Their spending has improved as their league position has. They've performed above themselves and earned the right to continue doing so.

Following their promotion in 07 they spent £16.2m and finished 12th, the next season they spent 17m and finished in 11th. Last season they spent 11m and came 13th. So the money spent has been proportional to where they positioned in the league, not the other way around.

Over the last 5 years they have been the fifth highest spenders in the league, but have failed to finish a season in the top half, that's not performing above themselves.

Your claim that Stoke are an established top half team and have had a limited budget simply aren't true. I agree with you in that they have performed well enough to deserve a place in the PL, but they haven't performed proportionately to the money spent

Pride Fighter

Saul-Goode9 wrote: »

Following their promotion in 07 they spent £16.2m and finished 12th, the next season they spent 17m and finished in 11th. Last season they spent 11m and came 13th. So the money spent has been proportional to where they positioned in the league, not the other way around.

Over the last 5 years they have been the fifth highest spenders in the league, but have failed to finish a season in the top half, that's not performing above themselves.

Your claim that Stoke are an established top half team and have had a limited budget simply aren't true. I agree with you in that they have performed well enough to deserve a place in the PL, but they haven't performed proportionately to the money spent

Spending is almost irrelevant. It is the outlay on wages that is. I dont think Stoke would be paying the wage levels of any of the top 5 and would probably be around 13th/14th there.

Pride Fighter

Paully D wrote: »

18) Australia, World Cup 2006: For outlining the value of packing the midfield by playing a 3-6-1 shape, and dominating possession against better sides.

Liverpool played a 3-6-1 in the Champions League Final in 2005. They did not start that way, but it got them the 3 goals in the second half to draw it, then win on penalties.