If for example he was Indian and India can't play football to save their lives, nor do they really care for the sport. Would it be different, I mean IMO if he helped India qualify for a WC and then manged to win it once, that should be more than Pele's 3 world cup wins,hell winning with India by yourself is better than Maradona's 1986 feat I just picked India but pick any country that has no real history in the world cup or football in general. I mean being Argentinian is great but people expect you to be the next Maradona Just a thought IMO as if George Best helped Northern Ireland to qualify and win a world cup then maybe a European would be standing next to an Argentine and Brazilian god. BEST scored 9 goals in 13 year span and 4 were against Cyprus for example and he was a great player if you watch videos of him
Best with Northern Ireland and Weah with Liberia are probably the best examples of this. Messi is better than both, IMO. It would definitely make ranking him a lot harder. He'd still be one of the greatest though since his club career would, presumably, be the same.
yes, because if he were Indian, he would have chosen cricket, and now he'd be kicking some arse in the English Premier League of Cricket or whatever league they have there for cricket.
Even if he will win the WC14 for Argentina, not sure he will be the "greatest" - (he will be in TOP10 all time though) so let alone India or Phlipines
Messi hasn't done anything with Argentina yet so I don't think it matters. If he can win a World Cup with them then there is no debate about who is the best ever. Until then, it will always be between him, Pele and Maradona for the foreseeable future.
Yes and no depends on HOW he performs to win it ... (liek if he wins it along with golden ball best WC player with goals + assists especially in Final) then he will strongly be in TOP5
he plays for one of the top heavyweights and best national teams in soccer and is not the greatest so i doubt he would be playing for a weak team.. he is not even the greatest from his on country right now let alone the greatest ever []__[]
Well I think winning the trophy with the individual Golden ball get's him a solid spot in the top five. As for his input, being top scorer wouldn't or shouldn't matter as I would imagine his role would be different for Argentina, though finishing in the top three would'nt hurt him either.
Maradona in WC86 came the closest to winning it with "India". While of course Argentina is a powerhouse historically, in the early to mid 80s they went through their biggest drought in talent, compounded by Bilardo leaving aside some of the few top players: Diaz, Trossero, Marcico, Fillol, Alonso and Gareca plus Passarella quitting on the eve of the WC. So Maradona won the WC with useful role players but noone of true greatness: Valdano, Ruggieri, Orlaticoechea, Burruchaga, Batista, etc. I just don't see Messi being able to pull this off. Of course, he won't have to, Argentina currently has Aguero, Tevez, DiMaria, Higuain, Mascherano, Coloccini, Pastore, Lavezzi all to play next to Messi.
To sum it up, no matter what Messi does or achieves he'll never be as good as Maradona, because Maradona was put on earth during days when defenders were inherently better and had better defending genes and on top of this he drug a bunch of retards who didn't know their left hand from a hole in the ground to a World Cup championship.
LOL, don't be so sensitive streeny. Messi can take the "Pele route" and win it in great style with a stacked team. Two sides of the same glorified coin.
I also think it's unfair to compare Messi to Maradona in 86. It was a special feat that few if any players could accomplish. I don't see Pele doing the equivalent of that either... which I guess would mean taking Brazil 1990 (I'm assuming this was their weakest talent wise in the last 50 years or so) team to the WC final. Or maybe the 1974 team?
He was injured out of the tournament. And now you're comparing todays Argentina national team with virtually no defense to the 3 time world cup winning Brazilian team, lol. Curious, how much of Maradona have you actually seen playing? Without lying please.
-- At the time of speaking, Messi has done nothing for Argentina. Maradona not only won the World Cup with a so and so team. He also put Napoli on the map when Serie A was almost at its peak. -- George Best's peak was very short. He left Manchester United around 27 years old. His downfall was much younger.
What nobody has mentioned so far is that the tournament is played in South America which increases his chances with 50%. European teams meet usually an handicap while Argentina has only Uruguay and Brazil from the same continent as contenders. Spain will probably not be as strong any more and Germany has suddenly, really strange, turned into the biggest chokers in the game. FIFA is also desperate for finding a new star after three consecutive disappointing World Cups. Personally, I hope he will fail in great style. I don't like him.
Pele was injured the same way Maradona was in WC90, but the outcomes were different obviously. I'm not comparing today's Argentina to the Brazil of Pele and Garrincha, however, Messi does have the strongest NT around him currently aside of Spain if we look at individual talents. He has no excuse to not win it in Brazil. I watched Maradona's entire Serie A career. Seems like you already have made up your mind about its value should Argentina win the next WC.
I like pucks honesty lol. Ok agreed, Messi should win or at least get to the finals of the next world cup.
Depends, there are many 'what if' scenarios possible. Too cheap and insecure to speculate on that. History does tell us though that these circumstances do not favour the European teams. I guess Spain will be in a transition phase and, I had never thought I would ever say this, I'm not very sure any more about the nerves and mental power of the Germans.
If there are many "what ifs" scenarios, why were you already determining the circumstances should Argentina win it? Germany still has its nerves and mentality, however, they will continue to lose to Italy or Brazil as it is their custom.
Hence people mentioning if he does it in the future, because Maradona has already done it during his playing career. Maradona did it when he was 25 it should be mentioned, but it doesn't matter it Messi does if when he is 27, 31 or even 35. He just has to do it. Regarding the topic at hand, it is both good and bad for Messi in terms of the 'GOAT' argument being from a nation like Argentina. First, it gives him the advantage of being on a team that can win the World Cup (because the hypothetical of winning the WC single-handedly with a team like India is an impossibility, even if you could create the literally perfect player). On the other hand though, it means he must win the WC, and if he does not then it almost eliminates his claim to be the GOAT on it's own. Neither are fair to the player from the smaller nation (e.g. Best) or the bigger on (e.g. Messi), but that is how both are perceived when reviewing a players career. It is the main reason in my opinion, why most see Pele & Maradona as 1a and 1b in terms of being the GOAT, with Cruyff just a shade below them even though he came within a whisker of doing it and may have a larger overall contribution beyond his own individual performances than anyone to ever play the game. --- In all honesty though, Xavi is the one who people should have been talking about as an all-time great over the last four or so years. It's just a shame there can be so much fickleness in sports to only focus on the most glamorous position for these types of things (e.g. the NFL 'MVP' award really being the 'quarterback of the year' award).