Yes, Xavi and Iniesta are great together. But you can't deny the contributions of other players and the role of both NT managers they've had. It's a total package that's led Spain to success. Casillas for example has been great for them in goal and has saved their bacon on number of occasions.
Pedro didn't play that well las season. This season he has picked up and has been very good. But Dani Alves has almost consistently been the player that assists Messi the most in the past few years. He and Messi and very good friends. This one not so much due to injuries to Alves and whatnot. If I had to guess this season it's probably been Iniesta since assist wise he's having one of the best of his career. But this past season Fabregas and Messi were connecting constantly.
I know for sure Dani Alves was Messi best friend (in assists), however, I am not sure about your number (10 is so low) but I;ll let Bada Bing or Yonko check on this .... Another food for thought: Zidane only gave 1assist to Henry over 40+games player together ... and say people would look down on Zidane's playmaking ability? Sometimes its hard to say ...
the play-makers in both teams, barca and spain are xavi and iniesta, they control de center, the attack, barca and spain always posses the ball, most of the time, the ball is with them. without them, nothing extra-ordinary would have happened. Fabregas is good but not at that level. Both teams will still be strong but no to the point where winning all these trophies.
Ok, we get it. You've made your point. It's not entirely true though. Xavi and Iniesta do not keep possession on their own for Barca or Spain. And Messi helps plenty with the playmaking at Barca. You don't seem to understand the mechanism of the system.
If you don't think Barca's and Spain's success depended on Xavi and Iniesta, I cant argue with you. As simple as that.
This contradicts you arguing for Pele being the best ever if performing for different teams is a criteria you are using to value players playing ability. I do believe Pele was the best ever, just saying...some consistency would be nice)
How so? 1- Pele was playing great for Santos 15years = 3 different team squad) 2- Playing Great for Brazil58-64= 1 team 3- Brazil 65-68 = 1 team 4- Brazil 69-71 = 1 team So total at least proven in 5 different teams Now, Xavi was well with 2 teams Barca but he just was great for "THIS BARCA" (06-now) + same core Spain NT = 1.5 different teams OK lets be generous he played well for TWO TEAMS! Lastly, it was orange to apples in this comparison anyway as Pele and Xavi were like day and evening ,,, I put these things ( teams and tactics formation) for Xavi and Pirlo since they were close in talent level!!!
Fabregas has more all around qualities (better goal scorer, eye for killer passes/assists, and able to play different positions) than Xavi and Iniesta, but they both control the midfield better than Cesc.
Not entirely. At Barca, Messi has been more influential for the success and continues to be. This fact is just undeniable. For Spain, Casillas and Villa (except for Euro2012 of course) have been equal contributors and important factors. Of course, Xavi and Iniesta are key players for both club and country, but they are not the only factors or as is the case at Barca, the main factors. I think your view is very limited on the matter.
LOL at how you are twisting things here. Bottom line is Pele played for only one club - Santos. That's it. And he played for Brazil, which had great generations of players over multiple editions. BTW, they also won a WC essentially without him in 62. And the expression is "day and night"....learn some english first then more about football. I will give you that, Fabregas has better eye for goal. But he is not better at killer passes. And Iniesta is the one who can play in more positions than him.
I did not twist anything ... read my lines I just felt "day and night" might be too harsh on Xavi (If Pele is day Xavi is more like evening LOL) Last one, I agree with "The one ..." comment: while Cecs is more efficient and decisive in goals/direct assist, INiesta was a bit better in MF bossing and passing, BOTH could play in many positions. Actually, Cecs was MORE PROVEN in many positions (Center FW, SS, wide FW, CAM and side MF) than Iniesta ever was (Side MF, SS and wide FW).
Saying that Pele was great for Brazil from 65-68 (did you pull those years out of your ass, btw) is like saying Ortega was great for Argentin from 00-03. It is not true as Pele (and Ortega) went out in the first round of the WC. If you want to subdivide the Brazilian generations from 57 to 72, then Pele ultimately flopped for Brazil during the mid-60s period.
Cesc is not better that Xavi or Iniesta as a center mid, yes he can score more goals but he is not really a forward either, he is another one of those fake 10's.
Which is exactly what i initially said when i mentionned they control the midfield better than Cesc can, but Cesc is more versatile and has more ammunitons in his chamber than both of them.
So did your a$$ get itchy when talking of Pele? Now next time do me a favor : GOOGLE and RESEARCH before you use your A$$ do the talking! First you do not know NOTHING of Pele so what is your question and I can answer? Do NOT ask with such attitude like "pretend to know things" For your own info: From 65 to 68: Pele got 30+gaols/24games in Brazil shirt ... (include some frindlies betweenBrazil and some European clubs like Aletico Madrid, and some Brazil clubs ..) a feast that NO Maradona and never Messi would get such stats OK? And do not forget ... Pele got injured in WC66 and side line for a while
Well too bad that during Pele's prime with Brazil all one remembers is his first round exit at the WC. 65 to 68 is not a particular period to be subdivided, you just pick it because it features Pele's best stats (but also his biggest failure).
WRONG\ again... Pele NEVER fAIL in any tournament when fit - Thanks GOD he was so athletic to only got 3 times injuries (WC62, WC66 and 68 minor ) So if Pele is "failure:" or FLOPPED for Brazil (or Santos) I suggest Messi SHOULD RETIRE by now - do not waste more time!
I read your lines and yes you did twist things. Pele has played for one club team only, end of story. How can you say you agree with me, but then say that Cecs is actually more proven in many positions? Let me make it clear to you: IMO Iniesta is the one proven to be better in more positions. He has played as CM, LW/RW, AM and DM. Fabregas has never played in wide positions, let alone proven himself to be great in them. He has mostly played as CM or AM. Only recently at the Euros he added a False 9. I still feel he is behind Iniesta in terms of versatility, passing, vision, decision-making and dribbling.
He played all his career in Brazil (unless you count NY Cosmos), so he was protected all his playing years by the CBF. It was only when he stepped "outside" in WCs 62 and 66 that the protection was not the same, and out he went in both WCs of the 60s. In WC58 he came in an unknown so there was no bullseye on him yet, it was only in WC70 that he delivered as a star. I have no doubt Messi will be a greater club player than Pele, he will challenge DiStefano and Puskas for greatest at that level, if he wins the next two WCs, I know it is an extremely tall order but should he pull it off he surpasses Pele then and there.
Actually Fabregas has played LWF in the 4-3-3 under Pep and now Vilanova. When Barca plays him, Xavi, and Iniesta at the same time Cesc is the most advanced player usually on the left And as you said when Messi isn't there he'll play the false 9 role at times.