This one sparked my interest during an argument about the subject as I challenged the idea that being a ‘system player’ is a negative, as some of the best players in history have been system players in some of the most successful systems (E.G. Sergio Busquets).
The problem seemed to stem from the fact that my understanding of what system player meant was someone who needed to be in the right set up to play at their, often world class, best and that taking them out of that system or in a team with a very different play-style would result in a big drop off in performance.
The person I was arguing with defined it as a player who is made to look better because they’re surrounded by better players in a ‘good system’, and is by definition not a key part of that system they just play a role.
I think this severely underestimates the importance of tactics and systems which are implemented by managers as well ignores the nuance of what it means to be a ‘good’ player. I also can’t help but worry that it’s a symptom of FIFA playing that people view players through the lens of ‘what would they be like to use in a FIFA game’ and this colours opinions.
To me, a system player can be better than a non-system player as they are more adaptable and coachable rather than always just playing ’their game’.
You must log in or register to comment.
I’d say Milner is a system player. Someone that can fill in almost any spot that’s needed. A lb or rb or midfielder or winger is injured and that one person slots in to fill the role. I’d say that’s a system player
Ji-sung Park. A decent player who’d do whatever task was asked of him rather than having to play “his” way and wouldn’t complain about it to boot.
Most famous example is he basically followed Pirlo around for an entire CL game and nullified him as that’s what SAF wanted. I swear Pirlo probably still wakes up even now and expects to see Park standing at the end of his bed.
I would say it’s more your definition than there’s. I would say maybe the best example of a current system player is Zinchenko. He’s a good technician and as seen for Ukraine is good I centre midfield but not world class.
He’d also be a terrible left back at pretty much every team bar City and Arsenal.
However, in the system the clubs play he is an incredible asset and key to how they want to play
In my opinion it is a player who is largely dependent on the system they are in. It doesn’t mean they are a bad player, just not necessarily versatile enough to fit into a lot of squads.
I’d say TAA, at least at right-back, is the best example. At Liverpool, he’s given a far more creative role than just about any other fullback in football today. His defensive weakness was never really relied on. Now Trent is a great player, and fits Liverpool like a glove, but you couldn’t slot him into any team and him be perfect overnight (I don’t think he’d be very good at Man United or Newcastle, for example).
I agree with this. Apparently he’s pretty average for England too. To be fair, I haven’t actually seen him play for England, but it’s just what I’ve heard from fans.
From my understanding the term system player only came about as an alternative to a talisman player.
Basically, a player that has some extreme physical attributes (mbappe) that allow him to determine the game all on his own is a talisman player. He’ll smash out goals from tiny advantages such that it doesn’t matter what system he is playing under, he is a threat to any team.
Contrary to that, a system player is someone who doesn’t have that extreme physical strength, but a high baseline on all skills and an exceptional ability to understand and execute any strategy or the main strategy in any situation. These players are typically still strong players but they lack one major strength and have consistent high level on many strengths.
A team will not rely on a system player to break open a strategic stalemate with some unexpected improvisation, just as a team will not rely on the talisman to grind out a role or strategy that isn’t tailored to their strength.
In reality most players at the top level are a mix of both, someone like griezzman is a system player with unreal ability that can be the talisman when called upon. Just like how henry was a talisman but assimilated into the system at barcelona.
I think this is kinda what I think as well, most players are system players, unlike a lot of other answers which are saying a system player is a player that fits in certain system. I would class it more as being a system player on an individual player, some players just have that ‘magic’ to change games on their own.
I think a lot of DM’s in the Alonso, Pirlo, Jorginho mould. You’d need a box to box CM who was capable of covering the running like Mascherano, Khedira, Gattuso, Kante. You’d also need very good defensive backs, as if your DM loses the ball then there’s no cover for your CB’s. I know good CB’s are useful, but with this type of DM - you don’t need so much centre backs that are good on the ball as the holding mid can link the midfield and defence - it’s about pure defensive acumen.
It’s a made up nonsense IMO.
It’s a team sport, everyone who is good is good because there’s a system around him and he understands his role in it.
For me a system player is a player that works well in a specific system but outside of this system, he’s not that good. I have a player for this, Gerson. Was amazing in Sampaoli system but outside of it, terrible.
Ole, Giroud
Gonna get hate from Messi fans but I’ll say Messi