It is almost certain that, by the time Euro 2016 rolls around, Wayne Rooney will be England's all-time leading goal scorer.
The current record -- Sir Bobby Charlton's 49 -- has stood for 44 years, and counting. Gary Lineker almost matched it, only to fall short after hitting one of the worst penalties Wembley has ever seen. He retired, agonisingly, on 48. There was a time when Michael Owen seemed sure to pass both men, but his body let him down before he could do so, and he never got past 40.
Rooney has beaten that mark already: he might have drawn a blank in Monday's 2-0 win against Switzerland, but his penalty in the friendly against Norway last week took him to 41. He is still only 28. As good luck would have it -- and presuming he avoids injury -- he will spend the next two years playing Lithuania, Estonia, Slovenia and San Marino twice each.
That's eight games to score eight goals, against some of the most accommodating opposition he could hope to encounter. Throw in a smattering of friendlies and a home game with Switzerland, and it is impossible to escape the impression that Rooney would have to try very hard indeed not to surpass Charlton before he heads out to lead his side at Euro 2016.
Indeed, England manager Roy Hodgson's decision to make the Manchester United striker his country's captain -- a boyhood dream, everything he's ever wanted (insert further clichés here) -- seems to guarantee that, barring injury, he will feature in the overwhelming majority of the 15 or so games England will play between now and the finals.
Let's assume -- as seems reasonable -- that England make the quarterfinals in Euro 2016; that's another five games, thanks to the expanded tournament. By the time Hodgson's team touch back on home soil to another flurry of recrimination, Rooney -- currently on 97 caps -- may even have overtaken David Beckham's 115 to become his country's most capped outfield player. He would still be only 30. Peter Shilton's record of 125 appearances for his nation would be within his sights.
Whatever you think of Rooney, whether or not you feel he has lived up to his early promise, whether or not you like what he stands for and how he comes across, there is a very good chance that he will retire as the most capped player in England's history, and the country's most prolific striker.
Steven Gerrard, his predecessor as captain, might have insisted last year that there "are only 11 England legends" in his mind -- the team that won the World Cup. Rather a harsh assessment on all of the other players in that squad, but it would be churlish to deny Rooney that status, as trite and as bereft of meaning as that word has become.
Rooney would unquestionably rank as one of the greatest players this country has ever produced. You could make an argument, in fact, that he is on course to be the greatest of them all, certainly outside the team of 1966.
It would not be a water-tight case, of course: countering it would simply be a matter of pointing out that England play a vastly inflated number of fixtures these days, making caps won in the Charlton era -- and probably even the Shilton era -- substantially more valuable, through their comparative rarity; the raft of centurions being churned out by England at the moment is proof of that. Then there is the fact that Rooney gets to play San Marino and Andorra with a reasonable degree of regularity, artificially boosting his figures compared to those of his predecessors.
(It is important to note that, conversely, the overall standard of opposition was probably lower in the 1960s and '70s: Norway and Turkey, two nations who warrant respect now, were swatted aside with ease then. International football has always had minnows. It's just that their identities have changed.)
That is a different debate, though, for a different time. What is more immediately intriguing is the context in which Rooney will -- and should -- secure his place in the pantheon. He will surpass Charlton, Beckham and perhaps Shilton, too, at a time when it looks a little like he is in the England team not because of what he is contributing, but because of who he is.
For a decade and more, one question dominated all discussion over the England team: How could the team be set up to get the best out of Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard? Managers Sven-Goran Eriksson, Steve McClaren and Fabio Capello all puzzled over it; Hodgson came closest to answering it, though less through any real managerial genius and more because of what age had done to change both players.
The Gerrard-Lampard conundrum became part of the national conversation, like the state of the NHS or "Strictly Come Dancing." (Which is what inspired "Dancing With The Stars." You're welcome, America.) Both were key figures for their clubs. Both were elite midfielders in the Premier League and the Champions League. It made no sense at all that they simply could not perform together. We were all sure that there must be an answer. We never got one -- not really.
This may have been because we were not asking the right question. Once it had been established that Gerrard and Lampard were not a natural fit, the question should not have been how to make them work, but which one of them should be given the chance to play. One of England's (many, many) flaws over the past few decades has been a comprehensive misunderstanding of what a national team is meant to do.
It is seen as an exercise in putting your XI best players on a pitch and finding a formation to suit. That is wrong. It may once have been right, but it is not now. It should be seen as an exercise in finding a system to win, and selecting the best players to fit that formation. (This is what Hodgson did not do in the World Cup, or against Norway, but kind of did against Switzerland.) The problem with Gerrard and Lampard was the fact that it was always assumed they both had to play. The idea that one of them could be dropped was anathema.
This is relevant to the position Rooney finds himself in now. It is unthinkable to drop him; he is certainly the most famous current England player, and in terms of innate ability, he is still ahead of the vast majority of his teammates. Hodgson has effectively guaranteed him his place by appointing him captain.
History, then, repeats itself. There is no sign that Rooney and Daniel Sturridge make an effective strikeforce. Judging by his performance Monday night, it is hard to see how Rooney is better qualified to play as a lone forward -- on form or on suitability for the role -- than either the Liverpool striker or even the in-form Danny Welbeck.
Rooney does not look much like Rooney any more. He no longer bullies opponents, shrugging them off the ball, rampaging down the pitch. His pace seems to have gone a little, and his strength, and most crucially of all, his energy. His malaise has lasted for at least a year, perhaps more. He seems inhibited, as though he is shrinking into himself.
That stands in sharp contrast to the dynamism and verve of the rest of the England team, best characterised by Raheem Sterling but exhibited, too, by the likes of Welbeck, Sturridge, Jordan Henderson and even, at times, Jack Wilshere. There are signs of a new type of English player developing, one comfortable on the ball, technically gifted, but jet-heeled and direct, too, a marriage of continental technique and Premier League pace.
Rooney looks like a relic of another age. To some extent, that is what he is: the last man standing from the golden generation. And yet his place is not in question, because English football cannot quite shake its belief that you have to play your best players, even if they do not suit the system and the system does not suit them. Rooney will break Charlton's record. He may well break Shilton's. He will have his place in history. His place in the future, though, is rather more in doubt.