Not looking too good I see, but it seems surprising. Not because of the players in question as there are absolutely great players in both sides, but because of the tactical advantages my side has, & the individual match-ups on the pitch.
I could see the attacking combination of Gullit, Suarez and Romario is incredibly strong - but Gullit wasn't a playmaker as such and it seems my defense is getting under-estimated here. Passarella and Kohler have a complete range of defending in their oeuvre - ground or in the air and have stopped some of the greatest attackers of their time. Also, what is the difference between both full-back set-ups for width? Facchetti was as adept as Carlos in attack, while he was better in defense. Alves is better in going forward, but Andrade is known to be defensively a rock. He won the Bronze Ball in the first ever Fifa World Cup that Uruguay (his team) won.
Even if both defenses are considered of similar quality, there's Yashin in goal for me which the opposition has to get through. Yashin was not an old school goalie at all, he was the archetypal control the box kind of goalie who snapped up everything in his area, if you'd watched his videos/games. He was quick off the line and had insane reflexes. He's what Neuer and Alisson aspire to be, not to mention his 150+ penalty saves in his career. Chilavert, while he was good in his own right, wasn't close to that level.
Also, my attack is not inferior to the opposition's. It's got an interchanging set-up with Di Stefano (one of the greatest footballers ever - not just one of the greatest forwards), Bergkamp (one of the greatest players of PL era) and Zico (again one of the best of his position ever) moving and exchanging passes, while all three were adept at scoring goals. The opposition has Sammer in a flat back 4 which could be exploited. Also, in the unlikely event, my side behind by 60 minutes, I could withdraw Bergkamp & bring a goal scoring central forward in Greaves.
Coming to the midfield, Didi and Matthaus cancel each other, while Coluna with all his ball playing abilities was a tough player to deal with as he pressed & harassed, while Socrates was a pure playmaker not with a defensive nous but playing in a deeper position, weakness of which will be exploited. Also, the opposition's DM is weaker, Souness was undoubtedly better than Dunga, my side's clearly winning the midfield battle.
It's a great game with two great sides, but I think Trend's thoughts earlier in the draft has finally caught up to me as I've got a lot of players of older times, against whom modern players like Romario and Suarez seem more attractive as we'all may have seen them live & admired.