Talk:Golden generation

Defining "Golden Generation"

Golden Generation does not necessarily mean that all players are the same age. It just means a group that play together for a while (eg. 4+ years). For example, Hungary's "Magic Magyars" (aka Golden Team) were a golden generation despite a possible disparity in age between many of the players (from the 1954 squad).

A golden generation is either a country's most exceptionally talented generation or exceptionally high achieving generation.

• Hungary (1954 World Cup runners up and never achieved anything like this again. Packed with stars.)
• France (1998 World Cup Winners, 2000 European Champions. Packed with stars)

too soccer-centric

This article is too soccer-centric, so I am going to add a couple of more sections. I would also suggest that some of the soccer sections be removed (although I wouldn't know which ones).--Macca7174_talk 11:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The number of soccer sections are irrelevant as long as the info is referenced.Dwanyewest (talk) 23:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Favourite Teams

There seems to be a lot of national teams referring themselves as golden generation without evidence or citations. From now on unless there are citations information will be removed. Dwanyewest (talk) 23:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

This is becoming a problem again people putting their favorite teams as Golden Generation without article to support that they were referred as such. If no evidence is provided a specific team from a reliable source was referred too as a Golden Generation team it should be deleted. Dwanyewest (talk) 06:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Who decides?

How is it decided which players are golden generation or not it seems very subjectively chosen. Dwanyewest (talk) 06:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Have just added a few players to the English national team's "golden generation".

Gary Neville is probably a debatable choice, but Sol Campbell, Ashley Cole and Joe Cole surely ought to be there.

Sol Campbell I think was the most glaring omission. Very important player in WC 2002 and Euro 2004. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.168.169 (talk) 07:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe players should only be added if there is a source to back up a claim that they are considered golden generation players not if subjective reasons. Dwanyewest (talk) 21:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think this is a fair argument because media are subjective too. This article is purely subjective and I believe that although unscientific, we should go by a common sense approach. For instance, if you can prove a team has significantly over achieved compared with that team's past, then that team should be included. Evidence you could use to back up arguments could be competitive results (I.e. World Cup and Continental Championships). If a team is deemed worthy of inclusion purely on a talent basis, a list of individual achievements could be used to back up selection.

Too recent-centric

It should be renamed into Celebrities of the last 10 years in UEFA soccer or something. It appears that at least a dozen national golden teams have burst out simultaneously. There is a separate article on the Golden Team of Hungary (1940s-1950s), but somehow it's not here. There was a Dutch superteam of Gullit-Rijkard-Koemans, 1986, it's not here either. NVO (talk)

Agree. The Golden Generation list is far not completed. The Golden Team of Hungary is a really good example for the missing Golden Generation team(s). PrisonMan (talk) 17:53, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

crap

this page is awful —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.12.167 (talk) 00:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree. This page is garbage. This is the most subjective topic ever. I don't even know why I'm wasting my time here. Every homer who thinks his team is a "Golden Generation", and has had his/her team called as such by ANYONE believes their inclusion on this page is justified. I mean...Belgium? Seriously?!?!?!?! Please use common sense. Wikipedia is not a cut-and-dry, black-and-white medium for examining the facts. In my opinion, there is only one Golden Generation, and that is the 90's/Early 2000's Portugal squad. There are other collections of young players of a similar age who can boast similar accomplishments- Fergie's Fledgelings, Busby's Babes, The Invincibles, 90's Cameroon Team- but there is ONLY ONE Golden Generation.Tslims99 (talk) 11:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

This aged poorly. 174.45.36.20 (talk) 23:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Costinha?

I don't understand why Costinha isn't included as a part of the first Portuguese golden generation. He was a member of both the Euro 00 and 04 squads, and the 06 World cup squad. He wasn't a member of the Portuguese youth squads, but the article states that many of these players were, not all of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.50.62 (talk) 23:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Ajax 95's ??

I suggest to add the only modern football golden generation provide by a single club (not a whole nation): the ajax 1995's team, lead by veteran danny blind and frank rijkaard and manager [louis van gaal]. all the following players were born from early to middle 70's, most of them have been trained in the youth ajax football academy, and they further join biggest teams in europe. Unfortunately they only win one tournament (champions league 95) and could never repeat the performance even with the national team. these players are: [patrick kluivert], [marc overmars], [edgar davids], [winston bogarde], [michael reiziger], [clarence seedorf], [edwin van der sar], [frank de boer], [ronald de boer], completed with young foreign mates: [jari litmanen], [finidi georges], [nwankwo kanu].

PS: As a french guy, I did not consider the team which won both 1998' world championship and 00' european championship as a golden generation. they did a great performance, but they are from 2 or even 3 generations —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mister xiong (talk • contribs) 16:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

ADD: Sorry to add this. AFC Ajax of the 90's is definitly a Golden Generation. That did win more than one title, The UEFA Champions League, The UEFA Super and the Intercontinental Cup. Let alone the title's they won in the Netherlands, the Eredivisie Title and the Johan Cruyff shield (dutch Supercup) and all of them in 1995. Added by Wim Brand (i don't have an account here, just felt adding this because u are wrong on this important part) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.238.66.148 (talk) 15:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

England Mark 2

I have removed the section relating to England Mark 2 as I can't find any reference to this group of players being referred to as a "Golden Generation". Though be honest though, that would apply to most of the rest of the article - it seems that any group of players that is tipped for success is included in the article. Shouldn't it simply be an article about teams that have been called a "golden generation"? Robinr22 (talk) 03:24, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

If would be easy to list a host of teams dubbed 'Golden Generation' by some media source. I think the criteria should include on-field success. Having an England team other than 1966 is ridiculous if you're not also going to include the numerous Spanish teams filled with talent that achieved nothing. Hungary of the 50s (highest Elo rating ever), Manchester United mid-90s (numerous cups) deserve consideration because of the evidence validating their claim as "Golden". What evidence supports England's 00s claim as "Golden"?Striker161 (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I think it's fair enough to describe the recently expired England team as a "golden generation" because they were described as such by a variety of different reputable sources, albeit mostly in terms of how they failed to live up to their promise. I agree that it is certainly hyperbole but that doesn't change the fact that that is how they were described. I don't think it's a question of finding evidence to support the term, because that would be original research, no? As long as they were described as such, then they fit the criteria. Obviously most of the teams listed here don't meet that criteria but the England 00 generation definitely does. Robinr22 (talk) 02:27, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Removing teams that are not sourced as being described as a "Golden Generation"

Having looked at a number of the teams listed here, most of them do not meet the criteria for being described as a "Golden Generation". I would read this criteria as simply being a reputable source describing them as such. I would contend that most of the teams on here are listed simply because they are great teams that had a lot of success (England excepted...) - again, this does not seem to qualify them as a "Golden Generation".

I am aware that the 00 England team and Portugese national teams actually were described as such. On a brief look, I can find no reference to the Brazil teams of 1970 and 1982 being described that way. If no-one has any objections then I will remove those teams that I cannot find any sources for in a week or so, and properly source those that remain. I'm aware that this will remove most of the article so want to make sure that there is time for any objections! It's worth noting though that most of the listings also seem to repeat information that is included elsewhere so it won't detract from the available information - just make sure that it's not duplicated in an inappropriate place. Robinr22 (talk) 14:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Argentina national basketball team 2000-on going

By winning the gold medal in the Americas Championship 2001, silver medal in 2002 FIBA World Championship, the gold medal in Basketball at the 2004 Summer Olympics, bronze medal in Basketball at the 2008 Summer Olympics, and gold medal in 2011 FIBA Americas Championship played in the city of Mar del Plata, Argentina. Resulting in Argentina reached the first position in the FIBA Men's Ranking at the end of the 2008 Olympic Games.

 Argentina (ARG)
Carlos Delfino
Gabriel Fernández
Emanuel Ginóbili
Leonardo Gutiérrez
Wálter Herrmann
Alejandro Montecchia
Andrés Nocioni
Fabricio Oberto
Pepe Sánchez
Luis Scola
Hugo Sconochini
Rubén Wolkowyski--Feroang (talk) 03:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Removing unnecessary junk

Whilst debating the merits of a name change for Golden Team Fraere pointed out some in consistencies in how we decide on which teams are included.

* 1994 Sweden team, which is mentioned at Golden Generation article is called a "golden team" too: [1].

* 1995 Ajax team, which is mentioned at Golden Generation article is called a "golden team" too: [2] [3]

* Ireland rugby team, which is mentioned at Golden Generation article is called a "golden team" too: [4]

I believe the above entries should be removed unless they are superficially mentioned as Golden generation teams by reputable sources and I am dubious also about the recent Basketball entry. If no one has any objections I shall be removing them. Dwanyewest (talk) 14:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Should players or just teams be listed?

I feel that even when reliable sources are provided for teams been described as Golden Generation players are listed arbitrarily with sources to support. My question is should we list players at all or only list them unless we can find a reputable source that the specific player was listed as been part of a Golden generation. Dwanyewest (talk) 14:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Belgium's Inclusion

The inclusion of Belgium on this list has led me to examine the neutrality of this page at all, and what sort of group of players should be deemed a "Golden Generation". For me, a group of players can only be considered a Golden Generation in one of two ways- If a group of players have acheived a great deal collectively for a club or country at either youth or senior level; or if a collection of great players who have acheived much individually come together to ply their trade for a club or national team. For example, the Portugal squad that won back to back Fifa Youth Championships, or Fergie's Fledgelings, who won all before them at youth and senior level, would be Golden Generations. Or even the dominant Dutch team of the 70's was a Golden Generation, even though they didn't win anything. By this measure, there is no chance that the current crop of Belgian talent can be considered a Golden Generation. Just because CNN calls a talented group of Belgians who might fetch a fair penny on the transfer market a "Golden Generation", doesn't necessarily mean they can be truly considered as such. None of these players have accomplished anything except attracting attention from big clubs and commanding some high transfer fees. NOT ONE of these players has won a league title in one of the big 3 leagues (La Liga, Premier, Serie A), let alone a major trophy in Europe or internationally, at youth or senior level. In fact, Vincent Kompany is the only player to win silverware (FA Cup) for a club in the top three leagues. Hardly the mark of a Golden Generation. Might I also point out, that every time "Golden Generation" is mentioned in the article, it is enclosed in quotation marks, almost to satire or question this as a serious suggestion, like the article is trying to distance itself from from being the source of such a suggestion. Belgium is not alone in this assertion. I question the inclusion of England's so-called "Golden Generation" on this list too, but at least they had players who acheived some level of success for club and country. I ask anyone who disagrees with this to come forward with your arguement as to why you think I am wrong. And just because CNN questionably called them a "Golden Generation" is NOT a valid arguement. Otherwise, it goes. Tslims99 (talk) 21:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

This aged poorly. 174.45.36.20 (talk) 23:48, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Romania's 1994 World Cup Team Inclusion

I think Romania' footaball team that reached the quarter-finals of the 94 World Cup should be included in this article. The team is mentioned in the following articles:

http://rateyourmusic.com/list/simsy91/the_real_fifa_world_cups_most_shocking_moments

http://fourfourtwo.com/interviews/qanda/259/article.aspx

http://bignewsmagazine.com/2005/07/the-%E2%80%9Cgolden-generation%E2%80%9D-takes-revenge/

I removed Sweden

It only had one football website as source. Sweden football team says that it only reached third place in 1994 World Cup, and doesn't explain how the 1994 generation is more golden than the 1958 generation, which got first place. The only other achievement by the same generation is semi-finals in 1992 European Championship. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Bronze Generations

Why is the German team that has yet to win a world cup featured as Germany's "Golden Generation"? There are better German teams from the past. The same could be said for England. The English team in particular was not any more talented than previous English teams and also achieved no success.

Tennis

What about tennis? Spain born 1975-86, USA born 1970-72, Argentina born 1975-84, Chile born 1976-81. And son on... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.86.235.249 (talk) 21:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Wales 2015-16

Surely they need to be mentioned here? They're absolutely flying at the Euros!

MSJC85 (talk) 00:42, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Golden generation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061106081248/http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/internationals/article1826303.ece to http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/internationals/article1826303.ece

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Why is this about football rather than Greek mythology?

Surely the primary meaning of "golden generation" is the first generation of mythological heroes as described by Hesiod? The meaning given here is simply a metaphor that belongs in a dictionary rather than an encyclopedia. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:46, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

RFC: Should individual players be listed?

The consensus is that individual players on specific teams should not be listed in the article on Golden generation sports teams.

Cunard (talk) 01:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Should individual players on specific teams be listed in the article on Golden generation sports teams? power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:31, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

This article is full of far too many examples. I'm not sure we should try to have a comprehensive list of teams at all, but listing individual players is certainly too much detail. I propose removing them all. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:31, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

• Weak support (Summoned by bot) Who actually belongs in a golden generation is important. However this page has lots of problems and even deciding who to list in the roster has issues so starting to address the issues of this page by removing the players seems as good of a place as any. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barkeep49 (talk • contribs)
• Support removal. (Summoned by bot) Individual players are a completely inappropriate level of detail for a non-List article. I'd support trimming or removing the list of teams as well. Layzner (Talk) 06:23, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support removal or discuss turning this into an outright list (listing it as list-class, retitling article to "List of...", etc. (Summoned by bot) -- I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 05:11, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Croatia since 2008 instead 2012 and Spain since 2008 instead 2006

Croatia on Euro 2008 hasa won with Germany (runners-up) at group stage. Croatia was stronger team on Euro 2008 than in 2012. In case when Belgium has since 2013 Croatia should have since 2008- because of Croatika's squad wasas singifically other than Belgium's on 2018 World Cup in Russia. Spain should have since 2008 because of spain golden generation is comonnly known as Vicente del Bosque's team. Polish generation also was speciffically god in 1970-1985 but golden generation is know as pl:Orły górskiego in 1970-1976 for Kazimierz Górski Dawid2009 (talk) 19:57, 17 August 2018 (UTC).

Australia's 2nd golden generation

Hi,

Recently Australia havesde it to the knockout stages for the 2nd time and despite the loss were still praised for fear efforts, in addition to upsetting tunisia and Denmark, as well as managing to qualify the world cup by beating Peru, do you think we can put in the 2nd golden generation, after all in the live rankings they are currently 27th, which is the highest ranking they got in 10 years, and in addition there were many Australian fans in Australia watching the game. 203.63.67.208 (talk) 21:34, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Australia under 'Asia'

I realise Australia falls under the AFC, but the titles list the continents by name, not their confederations, and Australia is not in Asia so this just looks weird, especially as the only one. Surely we should either change the names to the confederations or relabel Australia under Oceania or Australasia, etc. To avoid confusion over the move from the OFC I'll change it to the latter unless there's a better solution. Harsimaja (talk) 23:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)