Everton 1969/1970 or Everton 1984/1985 Which Squad Was Better?

[Cork Evertonian]

I'd be very confident that if they played once, the 1970 team would have a chance and if they played 10 times, the 1980s side would win seven. I understand the nostalgia and reverence for the 1970 side. They were tremendous - but they made very little impact on the wider football world and are almost always an afterthought when discussion of the great sides of that era occurs. People remember Leeds United under Review, the Arsenal double side, Chelsea with Chopper Harris, and Mercer's Manchester City before they even give our lads a sniff. We were, essentially, a one-season wonder. All of the others mentioned won a trophy in multiple seasons or multiple trophies.

You mention how exciting the prospect of this Everton side taking on the Ajax of total football fame would be, but, in the 1971 final, that Ajax side brushed aside the Panathinaikos that eliminated us. Given that they won two more European Cups and we finished 15th and 17th in those seasons in the league, it is a contest only in people's fevered imaginations. We just weren't that good over any extended period of time. One-season wonders.

The 1970 team couldn't win in Europe with a clear run, yet the 1980s side did win in Europe despite being banned for most of their existence. I don't think it's fair to compare the 1970 side with the 1980s team. The 1970 side was lovely, but people do them no favours when pitting them against the greatest side in our history and one of the greatest of all English sides.

Well they were robbed by a bent ref against Panathinaikos. A few of them, were in the 1966 FA Cup winning team as well. Your post shows an ignorance of the 1970 side, that i find to be kind of disrespectful. But each to their own. We won't be producing a team as good as 1970 or 1985 any time soon!

But there is no doubt, that the 1970 side collapsed pretty badly after that league title win. But they played some great football, in the two seasons prior to that 1969/1970 season though. So one season wonders i don't think so.

They probably should have beaten West Brom in that 1968 FA Cup final as well. To be honest i think both the 1970 and 1985 teams, should have won even more trophies.

The 80's squad is the clear winner alright on the trophy front though. But i think the 1970 team, holds it's own with any side from it's era. Right well happy Christmas everyone. I hope you all have a good day.

 

[degsy]

Who would win, in a game between the 1970 and 1985 team?

Let's be real here. Easy decision. I don't even think it would be close either.

View attachment 149396

Show your working out please

 

[Major Gowen]

Not winning as many trophies as we should have is a venerable Everton tradition, as this observer noted a mere ninety-odd years ago:

“Some of the greatest combinations known in football have played for Everton, a club renowned for exploiting the best class of football…Yet how singularly small is the record of honours won by the Goodison Park club…Everton have only thrice won the championship during the thirty-seven campaigns which have been concluded, and have only once carried off the English Cup.”

P J Moss, Clubs That Have Made Soccer – Classic Everton, Sunday Pictorial, 29 December 1929, page 21

 

[Major Gowen]

Well they were robbed by a bent ref against Panathinaikos.

One of the worst decisions I've ever seen. An absolute shocker. The penalty that never was.

 

[Drico]

So you don't think that comparative strength in depth of the league is a factor to be considered when judging teams from different eras?

Of course I do. I simply don't subscribe to the notion that the league was harder to win in 1970. The best club of that era, Leeds United, were not as good as the second-best club of the mid-80s - Liverpool. They dominated in a way Revie couldn't have dreamed of, and they did it in Europe as well, suggesting dominance beyond national boundaries, until we came along. At some point, one has to conclude that a team that finishes second a lot isn't quite as good as its supporters suggest. That Leeds side was wonderful, but they failed to dominate in the manner of the club our 1980s side had to overthrow: Liverpool. The trophy count attests to that - and those were won in an era when English clubs ruled Europe. In summary, that Liverpool side would have dominated just as much in the early 1970s as they did in the 1980s. That we overthrew them and won multiple trophies in three separate seasons is testament to the greatness of Kendall's side.

 

[Drico]

Well they were robbed by a bent ref against Panathinaikos. A few of them, were in the 1966 FA Cup winning team as well. Your post shows an ignorance of the 1970 side, that i find to be kind of disrespectful. But each to their own. We won't be producing a team as good as 1970 or 1985 any time soon!

You're entitled to your opinion - I won't be describing yours as "ignorant", but I will describe it as "sentimental". In my view, it clouds your judgement. Your preference is your own - and not something to contest - but the evidence is clear in terms of greatness. I'm not disrespecting the 1970 side. It deserves its place in the pantheon of our greatest sides at number 2. Given the, in my opinion, utter superiority of the team at number 1, that's a huge achievement.

One thing I will concede, though, is there is an argument that Harry Catterick, the brain behind the 1970 side, was the greatest manager in our club's history. Yes, greater than even the sainted Howard. Why? He built TWO separate championship-winning sides. Howard struck gold once and then suffered diminishing returns. Catterick did one of the hardest things in football by winning trophies with two different sets of players. That showed he was, effectively, independent of the players. He was able to repeat his trick with different raw materials. If it wasn't for his personality - or lack, thereof - he would be revered today.

 

[roy vernon]

Of course I do. I simply don't subscribe to the notion that the league was harder to win in 1970. The best club of that era, Leeds United, were not as good as the second-best club of the mid-80s - Liverpool. They dominated in a way Revie couldn't have dreamed of, and they did it in Europe as well, suggesting dominance beyond national boundaries, until we came along. At some point, one has to conclude that a team that finishes second a lot isn't quite as good as its supporters suggest. That Leeds side was wonderful, but they failed to dominate in the manner of the club our 1980s side had to overthrow: Liverpool. The trophy count attests to that - and those were won in an era when English clubs ruled Europe. In summary, that Liverpool side would have dominated just as much in the early 1970s as they did in the 1980s. That we overthrew them and won multiple trophies in three separate seasons is testament to the greatness of Kendall's side.

Did you ever see that Leeds side play? A crowd of dirty barstewards, but, they were an extremely gifted football side. Even the so called enforcer Norman Hunter was a superb footballer.

 

[Jamo Martinez]

Of course I do. I simply don't subscribe to the notion that the league was harder to win in 1970. The best club of that era, Leeds United, were not as good as the second-best club of the mid-80s - Liverpool. They dominated in a way Revie couldn't have dreamed of, and they did it in Europe as well, suggesting dominance beyond national boundaries, until we came along. At some point, one has to conclude that a team that finishes second a lot isn't quite as good as its supporters suggest. That Leeds side was wonderful, but they failed to dominate in the manner of the club our 1980s side had to overthrow: Liverpool. The trophy count attests to that - and those were won in an era when English clubs ruled Europe. In summary, that Liverpool side would have dominated just as much in the early 1970s as they did in the 1980s. That we overthrew them and won multiple trophies in three separate seasons is testament to the greatness of Kendall's side.

I don't subscribe to the notion that the league was necessarily more competitive in the 80s than thoughout the 60s. And I certainly don't think you can categorically say that European success proves the point futher. The fact is, British clubs didn't take Europe as seriously back in that period and were actively discouraged by both the FA and the Football league. Despite that, between 1968 and 1973 English clubs won a European cup, 2 cup winners' cups and 6 consecutive Inter city fairs/UEFA cups. Indicating a strength in depth, ie a lot of teams that will push you every Saturday (as it generally was back then). So it's possible that the great Leeds team didn't dominate as much as Liverpool in the 70s and 80s because it was harder to dominate

At the end of the day, I don't necessarily think you're wrong. I'm playing devil's advocate because I don't think it's so black and white.

 

[degsy]

Not winning as many trophies as we should have is a venerable Everton tradition, as this observer noted a mere ninety-odd years ago:

“Some of the greatest combinations known in football have played for Everton, a club renowned for exploiting the best class of football…Yet how singularly small is the record of honours won by the Goodison Park club…Everton have only thrice won the championship during the thirty-seven campaigns which have been concluded, and have only once carried off the English Cup.”

P J Moss, Clubs That Have Made Soccer – Classic Everton, Sunday Pictorial, 29 December 1929, page 21

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

 

[StuBarlow]

Only saw the 80s lot but that was a team. Scary all over the park.

 

[degsy]

One of the worst decisions I've ever seen. An absolute shocker. The penalty that never was.

View attachment 149438

One of many, 66 cup final for one.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

In truth I can’t place one over the other , you couldn’t get a ciggy paper between them.
I feel enormously privileged to have witnessed both of these great Everton teams.
If I was forced into a slight preference it would be the 69/70 side , the football they played was sublime and they set the bar for what I believe an Everton side should aspire to.
Commentator’s at the time believed they would dominate the coming decade, that they didn’t remains one the mysteries and tragedies of our history.
Man for man the only players out of the 80s side I would put in to Catterick’s side would be possibly Heath and definitely Southall. West was a great goalie but Southall was without doubt the best goalkeeper I have ever seen, and remains so.
However I won’t be voting because choosing one over the other seems disrespectful, they were both outstanding sides whose like we are unlikely to see in Royal Blue shirts again, sadly.

 

[Major Gowen]

The story of the 1969-70 title win, simply for the pleasure of it

 

[Major Gowen]

One thing I will concede, though, is there is an argument that Harry Catterick, the brain behind the 1970 side, was the greatest manager in our club's history. Yes, greater than even the sainted Howard. Why? He built TWO separate championship-winning sides. Howard struck gold once and then suffered diminishing returns. Catterick did one of the hardest things in football by winning trophies with two different sets of players. That showed he was, effectively, independent of the players. He was able to repeat his trick with different raw materials. If it wasn't for his personality - or lack, thereof - he would be revered today.

Spot on. One oft-overlooked point to be weighed: Kendall's astonishingly bold decision to scrap the 1984-85 formula in favour of Lineker and a much more direct game. That was a braver move than just about any other I've seen from a title-winning manager.

 

[Drico]

Did you ever see that Leeds side play? A crowd of dirty barstewards, but, they were an extremely gifted football side. Even the so called enforcer Norman Hunter was a superb footballer.

I am an avid archive football DVD collector - I have multiples of their games in my collection. The wonderful Big Match DVD collection devotes two superb volumes to that side, one of the very best sides of all time - but also a little unlucky. For one reason or another, they tended to finish second when first seemed a more natural destination. For all their ruthlessness, they tended to fall down when it mattered. I don't think it was a mental thing - I just happen to think that they had little depth and one or two of their first eleven - Gary Sprake for starters - was two levels beneath the rest of the side. This is why they were, in my opinion, inferior to the great Liverpool side of the 1980s. If they ever had a player or two who was inferior to the rest, they got rid of them pretty sharpish.

I'm not dismissing them out of ignorance. I am simply saying that they were not quite as good - nor as well-resourced - as the side Kendall's Everton had to overthrow in 1984.