Jump to content
IGNORED

Golden Generations


Lanterne Rouge

Recommended Posts

With the World Cup starting today it got me thinking about previous tournaments and I started wondering if some countries do really have `golden generations`. Not the consistently successful ones like Brazil, Italy or Germany but the more `middling` nations who have a storming World Cup or Euros about once every thirty years or so.

Examples

Bulgaria   USA 94

Denmark   Euro 92

Czech Republic  Euro 96

Croatia  France 98

Turkey  Japan/Korea 02

I`m sure there are many more but is it something nations at this level have to get used to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Red Right Hand said:

With the World Cup starting today it got me thinking about previous tournaments and I started wondering if some countries do really have `golden generations`. Not the consistently successful ones like Brazil, Italy or Germany but the more `middling` nations who have a storming World Cup or Euros about once every thirty years or so.

Examples

Bulgaria   USA 94

Denmark   Euro 92

Czech Republic  Euro 96

Croatia  France 98

Turkey  Japan/Korea 02

I`m sure there are many more but is it something nations at this level have to get used to?

I've been wondering when we last didnt have one.

Before my time but we did well in 86 and 90

Poor in 92 and not in 94. So maybe then

Then after that is when our 'golden generation' started breaking through.

First tournament of my lifetime was 96 when we reached the semis and its been downhill since then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RUSSEL85 said:

I know it's a Euro tournament but Greece 2004 :blink:

Was that a golden generation or a tactically astute manager making the most of what his players could do well?

The only time they conceded more than 1 they lost and they didnt concede at all after the groups, player wise.

There were no real 'names' in the squad, the best known probably Dabizas, Papadopoulos and Karagounis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

Was that a golden generation or a tactically astute manager making the most of what his players could do well?

The only time they conceded more than 1 they lost and they didnt concede at all after the groups, player wise.

There were no real 'names' in the squad, the best known probably Dabizas, Papadopoulos and Karagounis.

They were possibly the most boring team ever to win a major tournament but they played to their strengths and that`s what you do with a squad of limited players - think Colin`s Cardiff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Red Right Hand said:

They were possibly the most boring team ever to win a major tournament but they played to their strengths and that`s what you do with a squad of limited players - think Colin`s Cardiff.

I certainly agree, but I suspect there have been better quality Greek sides, hence the question, golden generation or coached well enough to overachieve.

In 2012 they got to the QFs and in 2014 the round of 16.

In 2011 they reached their peak place in the FIFA rankings.

But the majority of the 2004 squad was retired by this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said:

I certainly agree, but I suspect there have been better quality Greek sides, hence the question, golden generation or coached well enough to overachieve.

In 2012 they got to the QFs and in 2014 the round of 16.

In 2011 they reached their peak place in the FIFA rankings.

But the majority of the 2004 squad was retired by this point.

Half the trouble with Greek football is that it`s a total shambles from top to bottom, riddled with corruption. We moan about the FA but I`m glad we`ve not got their lot in charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Red Right Hand said:

Half the trouble with Greek football is that it`s a total shambles from top to bottom, riddled with corruption. We moan about the FA but I`m glad we`ve not got their lot in charge.

I wont pretend to know much about Greek football.

It's a quiet night at work and I've done a lot of googling!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great topic.  I'd not include a squad having a good run in one tournament  as a "Golden Generation".  I think a "generation" needs to hold together as a squad for at least two tournaments, and often be bookended by failure to qualify for a tournament.  Also need at more than one name of real quality.

@Red Right Hand, of yours I'd put Croatia in the latter (unlucky v Germany in Euro 96), and Turkey.  I'd put Bulgaria and Denmark more in the "Golden Performance" category.

I would add Portugal 2000-2004, Ghana 2010-14, Sweden 1994 - 1998, Nigeria 1994-98, France 1980-86 to the list.

I think England 1966 a good shout because of 1968 and 1970. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Red Right Hand said:

The one that brought it to mind was Bulgaria in USA 94. They were awesome in that World Cup and no-one could live with Stoichkov and co but I don`t think they`ve even qualified for anything since.

Their golden generation dragged them to world cup '98 as well, but they drew with Paraguay 0-0, were beaten narrowly by Nigeria, and then got thumped 6-1 by Spain in their final group match.

They've been in the doldrums since then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh those Croatia and Czech sides were not merely one off tournament wonders- the shock was them underachieving in subsequent years and in Czech's case reached the semis in 04 too, played beautiful football.

Those middling nations had bona fide good sides though- particularly those 2. Bulgaria did well indeed from about 92-97, @Tom Fleuriot . They narrowly went out in Euro 96 in a group with France, Spain and Romania- somewhat of a group of death!

Belgium? Overrated tbh- how many reach the latter levels of CL? Very good side yes, but some fantastic world beaters? Not yet- too much to prove. Euro 2016 was perhaps their big opportunity to date.

Spain first team to win 3 tournaments on the bounce?. Bona fide top side tbh, better than middling- had won a prior Euros too and reached a final (60's and 80's).

Turkey? Qualified for quarters in Euro 2000 too, qualified for Euro 96 and the backbone of that side won a UEFA Cup with Galatasaray and performed well in CL with them so again, more than a one hit wonder IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Tbh those Croatia and Czech sides were not merely one off tournament wonders- the shock was them underachieving in subsequent years and in Czech's case reached the semis in 04 too, played beautiful football.

Those middling nations had bona fide good sides though- particularly those 2. Bulgaria did well indeed from about 92-97, @Tom Fleuriot . They narrowly went out in Euro 96 in a group with France, Spain and Romania- somewhat of a group of death!

Belgium? Overrated tbh- how many reach the latter levels of CL? Very good side yes, but some fantastic world beaters? Not yet- too much to prove. Euro 2016 was perhaps their big opportunity to date.

Spain first team to win 3 tournaments on the bounce?. Bona fide top side tbh, better than middling- had won a prior Euros too and reached a final (60's and 80's).

Turkey? Qualified for quarters in Euro 2000 too, qualified for Euro 96 and the backbone of that side won a UEFA Cup with Galatasaray and performed well in CL with them so again, more than a one hit wonder IMO.

That early 2000s Turkey side had some cracking players, maybe not any world class ones, but the next tier down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...