The Ultimate Soccer Player to Walk the Earth

[TKORL]

What you need to understand is that while both players were truly great (Muller/Romario), they were different in styles from one another. Muller who I've seen play a few times while in the NASL as well as kicked about with the guy was as stated a gun slinger. Romario another player I saw once live and many times on the tube played with much more flair imho. I personally rate Muller higher than Romario but not by very much at all. Beckenbaur deserves to be mentioned as a potential ultimate because he did so much so well. I believe he could've played nearly any position on the pitch he wanted yet his greatest strength lied at the back running things from there. Statistics especially gols/assists are nice but they don't always tell an accurate story.
It's irrelevant who had more flair. As a stiker your job is to score goals, everything else is secondary. If Muller scores more goals with Romario showing greater flair, Muller is the better goalscorer.

[Moishe]

It's irrelevant who had more flair. As a stiker your job is to score goals, everything else is secondary. If Muller scores more goals with Romario showing greater flair, Muller is the better goalscorer.

I'm not sure I questioned whether or not Muller was the better scorer. Actually check my post history and you'll see Der Bomber was one if not my favorite scorer of all time. Romario on the other hand got more of his teammates involved the game as a passer as well. Since this isn't the "The Ultimate Gol Scorer to Walk the Earth" thread, I'll just say Romario was somewhat a more rounded player than Muller but clearly not the poacher or gun slinger another poster rightly referred to him as.

[GRBomber]

The whole "Pele scored 282982932 goals in Brazil and the USA, so he is the best" doesn't hold much water with me, when deciding who was better, Pele or Maradona.

Diego is more of an attacking midfielder than an all out striker and he still scored 116 goals in 166 for Argentinos Juniors. If Maradona was afraid to go to Europe, was afraid to take on the likes of Juventus, Inter, Milan, Roma, week in, week out, then he could have just stayed in South America forever and scored 38298292929 too.

But how boring would that have been? It would ruin the story of Diego and he wouldn't be as special as he is.

Are you saying Pele stayed in Brazil because he was afraid of playing against "better" teams?
If that is your point, then you need to do a little research. Santos travelled a lot back in the day and beat many of these teams you mentioned.

Today we see guys like Kaka, Ronaldinho, Pato, Anderson and others arriving in Europe before they even grow beards. It was not always like this.
Brazil was full of great players and Pele was happy playing at home.

He had no reason to move.

[Perú FC]

Totally agree with GRBomber; and Brazilian League in times of Pelé was one of the better leagues in the world, at the same or more level of Italian or English league. All the "stars" stayed in Brazil (just we've look the squads of world winners '62 or '70), and the competence was in a top level.

Pelé hadn't a reason to left one of the best clubs in one of the best leagues in the world in those times.

[kingkong1]

It does seem the consensus is b/w El Diego and Pele, two players I've seen live at different stages of their careers.It seems to me that this polarization between Pelé & Maradona is more a result of the rivalry between opposing generations than a genuine ultimate clash involving those who are supposed to be 'the two best players of all times'.

People who grew between the 50's/75 would never accept it: for them the duel will always be btw Pelé/Di Stéfano, Pelé/Puskas, Pelé/Garrincha, Pelé/Beckenbauer, Pelé/Best, Pelé/Cruyff, most of them, in their opinion, specially the 3 first (Di Stéfano, Puskas, Garrincha), quite superior to Maradona.

In Brazil we even have the example of real elder fans who still maintain that Leônidas da Silva, Zizinho, Domingos, Romeu, Tim etc were way better than Pelé, Garrincha & Cy!...

Maradona was the icon that those (anymore not so) newer generations - who grew up between 70's/2000 - finally 'found' to confront the 'heavyweights' of the old times, specially Pelé.

And thus to affirm themselves (what's perfectly justifiable: all generations do that).

Many stories were invented by them to enhance the brilliance of the new idol: that he faced the task of playing (& succeeding) in 'the most competitive league of the planet' (and Pelé stayed in the 'easy Brz league'); that he hadn't around him (on the contrary of Pelé) 'a constellation of great players to help him'; that football at his time 'had a faster pace' while at Pelé's time was 'much slower' etc etc (but that's a discussion to be held in an appropriate thread).

He's even seen by the most fanatic as the Saviour, the Messiah, a martyr like Che Guevara who came to save world football from the claws of devilish FIFA and its Dark Eminence, the tyrant Pelé.

In my biased opinion (since I belong to the 1st generation which is by the way as biased as Maradona's fans') I'm pretty sure that - for the coming generations - that clash will focus on Pelé x Somebody Else that will excel in the future football world (and so on & on)...

The very newest generations in fact already regard El Pibe as a respectable 'dynosaur' the same way we regard Friendereich in the 10's/20's, Bican in the 20/30's's or Piola in the 30/40s...

Maradona as a runner-up soon will be lost in oblivion (& will be one more in the vast gallery of 'great' players who aspired to the King's throne)...

[AllWhitebeliever]

The whole "Pele scored 282982932 goals in Brazil and the USA, so he is the best" doesn't hold much water with me, when deciding who was better, Pele or Maradona.

Diego is more of an attacking midfielder than an all out striker and he still scored 116 goals in 166 for Argentinos Juniors. If Maradona was afraid to go to Europe, was afraid to take on the likes of Juventus, Inter, Milan, Roma, week in, week out, then he could have just stayed in South America forever and scored 38298292929 too.

But how boring would that have been? It would ruin the story of Diego and he wouldn't be as special as he is.

. . . . But Pele was an attacking Midfielder than an all out striker too. . . .
. . . .
with more flair and more outrageous skills and repertoire. . . he was amazing and it looks so beautiful and artistic and unstoppable. . .Which is why I have Best as number two before Maradona, he too was achieving the same in his abilities . . .They were able to use both foot equally with great balance and great accurate use of ball at a elite level with both foot. Maradonna achieve that with one foot but it limited his options with other foot. However he does heads off Puskas (a left footer with a bit of a right foot) and Garrincha (a right footer with a bit of a left foot) and Di Stefano (a two footer playerwith a slight preference with the right like Pele and Best).. . .

I thought that I might mention that if Garrincha was born with no birth defects, he wouldn't end being a right winger favouring his right foot and could have been more in the middle of the park and then could have climbed in second behind Pele if not even number one on my list. . . but it goes to show that while there is some innate gift that these players have, it must include amazing dedication and discipline to achieve the high football status they are regarded in.

:cool:

[Moishe]

It seems to me that this polarization between Pelé & Maradona is more a result of the rivalry between opposing generations than a genuine ultimate clash involving those who are supposed to be 'the two best players of all times'.

People who grew between the 50's-75 would never accept it: for them the duel will always be btw Pelé/Di Stéfano, Pelé/Puskas, Pelé/Garrincha, Pelé/Beckenbauer, Pelé/Cruyff, most of them, in their opinion, specially the 3 first (Di Stéfano, Puskas, Garrincha), superior to Maradona.

Maradona was the icon that the newer generations (70's-2000) finally 'found' to confront the 'heavyweights' of the old times, specially Pelé.

And thus to affirm themselves (what's perfectly justifiable: all generations do that).

Many stories were invented by them to enhance the brilliance of the new idol: that he faced the task of playing (& succeeding) in 'the most competitive league of the planet' (and Pelé stayed in the 'easy Brz league'); that he hadn't around him (on the contrary of Pelé) 'a constellation of great players to help him'; that football at his time 'had a faster pace' while at Pelé's time was 'much slower' etc etc (but that's a discussion to be held in an appropriate thread).

In my biased opinion (since I belong to the 1st generation) which is, BTW, as biased as Maradona's fans (who belong to the second) I'm pretty sure that - for the coming generations - that clash will focus on Pelé x Somebody Else that will excel in the future football world (and so on & on)...

And Maradona as a runner-up will be lost in oblivion (& will be one more in the vast gallery of 'great' players who pretended the King's throne)...

I've got to disagree with you on a few points. Firstly is that this is an argument between the perception of two different generations when it comes to the whole Pele/Maradona issue. My viejo has about 12 years on you and my abuelos lived well into their late 90's and with all due respect your generations argument carries no water because they all got to enjoy these great players. One thing they all agreed on was that Pele was without question the most skilled player they've ever seen. What put Diego into that rare air was a dogged determination and drive like no other. 1986 is considered the greatest ever performance in a WC for a reason and again that's not some generational consensus.

I've asked my viejo numerous times about Di Stefano has my father may have seen every match he played for river plus a few in Bogota' and as much as it pains him to say it, Diego had that something that Alfredo didn't and that was the key difference. I believe your opinion of Maradona comes down more to his being Argentine than anything else.

I'm also curious about these stories invented to enhance the "new idols" image. I've never been one to ever use the argument of the games pace or better teams, leagues.....and I challenge you find a post that contradicts that. The men of older generations with as much knowledge and experience watching the game also hold Maradona as one of the two best ever. What makes your opinion and theories more credible than theirs?

[kingkong1]

I've asked my viejo numerous times about Di Stefano has my father may have seen every match he played for river plus a few in Bogota' and as much as it pains him to say it, Diego had that something that Alfredo didn't and that was the key differenceI think Di Stéfano is regarded in Argentina more as a 'deserter' and a 'mercenary' for the fact of having acquired Spanish nationality & even having officially played for his adopted country, while Maradona was the 'pátria em chuteiras' and wore with authentic passion the albiceleste colours, and that's probably that 'something' that for them Di Stéfano didn't have.I believe your opinion of Maradona comes down more to his being Argentine than anything else.I share precisely the same belief regarding YOUR opinion of Maradona: the belief that for you & your grand parents El Pibe was better than Di Stéfano because of his being so much more Argentinian than Di Stéfano.I'm also curious about these stories invented to enhance the "new idols" image. I've never been one to ever use the argument of the games pace or better teams, leagues.....and I challenge you find a post that contradicts thatI know that, and I was not referring personally to you when I mentioned thatWhat makes your opinion and theories more credible than theirs?In my whole post I made absolutely clear that my opinions are biased (as much as anybody else's here)...

[AllWhitebeliever]

What you need to understand is that while both players were truly great (Muller/Romario), they were different in styles from one another. Muller who I've seen play a few times while in the NASL as well as kicked about with the guy was as stated a gun slinger. Romario another player I saw once live and many times on the tube played with much more flair imho. I personally rate Muller higher than Romario but not by very much at all. Beckenbaur deserves to be mentioned as a potential ultimate because he did so much so well. I believe he could've played nearly any position on the pitch he wanted yet his greatest strength lied at the back running things from there. Statistics especially gols/assists are nice but they don't always tell an accurate story.

I agree with virtually everything you have said expect that I would tend to have Beckenbeur as a forerunner of the Ultimate team player (or player's player) rather than Ultimate soccer Player which indicates all-round skill and gifted. If Beckenbeur had amazing enough football skill as the others on my list, he would no-doubt be running things from the midfield without the fear of losing the ball. If he was a CB and his team was up a few goals and he had the skill on those in the list then he would have taken the ball up from the back as he did countless times before but he would also start to run circles around the midfield opposition to show off his ability and wow the crowds. Sadly there is little of such facts and he knew his strengths and play it to his ability, but his discipline is for the team's defence above all else and hence less risk and less personal skill improvement that a quality midfielder and forward has freedom to work on. if Beckenbeur believed that he best contribution was with the defence and let others to cover the midfield or the midfielders were enough quality for him to work with that he was not need to runs thing there, then it somewhat indicates that he also knew that his weakness as well. He may have been a great CM and a great CM would contribute more to the team than a great SW or CB being able to transforms from either attack or defence in the middle of the park. However since we are talking about the ultimate soccer player, I'm afraid that being a SW or CB has its drawbacks and while Beckenbeur has the mark of the greatest defender or even greatest teamplayer (maybe even best postional player), he was not able to demostrate outside that. Usually your best player gets to do something in the middle of the park at the standard that we are talking about. Whereas much of my list has much written about their ability to defend with the same vigour as their teammates despite their usual position and get plenty of turnovers. Although it is harder to defend for forwards/midfielders to personally approach a player (in their position) possessed with the ball than for that player with ball approaching your defending position.

When I talk about ultimate soccer player, I think of what he is able to do with the ball as a playmaker who is in the position to have the option to either do things for himself or for his teammates, although what he does for himself at this level also does more for the team as well. Whereas players that does well for the team are limited to show what he able to do with the ball since it is naturally more unit organization rather than personal.

:cool:

[Moishe]

I think Di Stéfano is regarded in Argentina more as a 'deserter' and a 'mercenary' for the fact of having acquired Spanish nationality & even having officially played for his adopted country, while Maradona was the 'pátria em chuteiras' and wore with authentic passion the albiceleste colours, and that's probably that 'something' that for them Di Stéfano didn't haveI share precisely the same belief regarding YOUR opinion of Maradona: the belief that for you & your grand parents El Pibe was better than Di Stéfano because of his being so much more Argentinian than Di StéfanoI know that, and I was not referring personally to you when I mentioned thatIn my whole post I made absolutely clear that my opinions are biased (as much as anybody else's opinion here)...[/QUOTE]


All cleared up and definitely in agreement with everything down to both our obvious biases. Saludos;)

[Moishe]

I agree with virtually everything you have said expect that I would tend to have Beckenbeur as a forerunner of the Ultimate team player (or player's player) rather than Ultimate soccer Player which indicates all-round skill and gifted. If Beckenbeur had amazing enough football skill as the others on my list, he would no-doubt be running things from the midfield without the fear of losing the ball. If he was a CB and his team was up a few goals and he had the skill on those in the list then he would have taken the ball up from the back as he did countless times before but he would also start to run circles around the midfield opposition to show off his ability and wow the crowds. Sadly there is little of such facts and he knew his strengths and play it to his ability, but his discipline is for the team's defence above all else and hence less risk and less personal skill improvement that a quality midfielder and forward has freedom to work on. if Beckenbeur believed that he best contribution was with the defence and let others to cover the midfield or the midfielders were enough quality for him to work with that he was not need to runs thing there, then it somewhat indicates that he also knew that his weakness as well. He may have been a great CM and a great CM would contribute more to the team than a great SW or CB being able to transforms from either attack or defence in the middle of the park. However since we are talking about the ultimate soccer player, I'm afraid that being a SW or CB has its drawbacks and while Beckenbeur has the mark of the greatest defender or even greatest teamplayer (maybe even best postional player), he was not able to demostrate outside that. Usually your best player gets to do something in the middle of the park at the standard that we are talking about. Whereas much of my list has much written about their ability to defend with the same vigour as their teammates despite their usual position and get plenty of turnovers. Although it is harder to defend for forwards/midfielders to personally approach a player (in their position) possessed with the ball than for that player with ball approaching your defending position.

When I talk about ultimate soccer player, I think of what he is able to do with the ball as a playmaker who is in the position to have the option to either do things for himself or for his teammates, although what he does for himself at this level also does more for the team as well. Whereas players that does well for the team are limited to show what he able to do with the ball since it is naturally more unit organization rather than personal.

:cool:

You present your points well and to me based on your criteria they do carry merit. For all the reasons you praised Beckenbaur, I could easily hold him in that light. As you said, he played to his teams needs but based on the mind and solid foundation of skills he had, if the need was for him to be a middie, I'd argue that he could've been brilliant there.

Based on todays game what players do you feel truly embody this ability?

[JumpinJackFlash]

Are you saying Pele stayed in Brazil because he was afraid of playing against "better" teams?
If that is your point, then you need to do a little research. Santos travelled a lot back in the day and beat many of these teams you mentioned.

Today we see guys like Kaka, Ronaldinho, Pato, Anderson and others arriving in Europe before they even grow beards. It was not always like this.
Brazil was full of great players and Pele was happy playing at home.

He had no reason to move.

Show me where they beat those teams? I heard they beat Fiorentina but thats it. Anyway that is entirely different to playing them week in, week out in real competitons (Serie A, European Cup, UEFA Cup)... there is a lot more on the line in those kind of matches and Maradona was man enough to stand up to that challenge, as was Sivori, as was Di Stefano (in Spain).

The thing I don't understand about Pele is this; I can understand how he would want to play for Santos for all of his career if he was really attached to his home (but lets not for a moment pretend his oposition were at the level of Europe's elite, where many of South America's best were playing already)... but then why, when he finally moved on did he move to some Mickey Mouse team in the USA that had only existed for four years? Surely that is the time when he could have gone to Europe and really tested himself, so there could be no arguements.

To me that is a clear contradiction in what Pele fans say he stood for, he was willing to play for a club other than his beloved Santos eventually, but when he did it was to some pub team league where he knew his scoring record would still be untouchable. If he was playing Real Madrid, Barcelona, etc every week instead of whatever now extinct USA sides it would be very different test.

[Tribune]

Show me where they beat those teams? I heard they beat Fiorentina but thats it. Anyway that is entirely different to playing them week in, week out in real competitons (Serie A, European Cup, UEFA Cup)... there is a lot more on the line in those kind of matches and Maradona was man enough to stand up to that challenge, as was Sivori, as was Di Stefano (in Spain).

The thing I don't understand about Pele is this; I can understand how he would want to play for Santos for all of his career if he was really attached to his home (but lets not for a moment pretend his oposition were at the level of Europe's elite, where many of South America's best were playing already)... but then why, when he finally moved on did he move to some Mickey Mouse team in the USA that had only existed for four years? Surely that is the time when he could have gone to Europe and really tested himself, so there could be no arguements.

To me that is a clear contradiction in what Pele fans say he stood for, he was willing to play for a club other than his beloved Santos eventually, but when he did it was to some pub team league where he knew his scoring record would still be untouchable. If he was playing Real Madrid, Barcelona, etc every week instead of whatever now extinct USA sides it would be very different test.

Jumpin, if you actually don't know about those encounters between Santos and european sides, do you really think you are qualified enough to make a comparison between Pele and Maradona ? Such a comparison should only be attempted with a solid documentation at hand, else you are knock out from the ring in the first round. And, with all due respect, this documentation you don't seem to possess.


The thing I don't understand about Pele is this; I can understand how he would want to play for Santos for all of his career if he was really attached to his home (but lets not for a moment pretend his oposition were at the level of Europe's elite, where many of South America's best were playing already)... but then why, when he finally moved on did he move to some Mickey Mouse team in the USA that had only existed for four years? Surely that is the time when he could have gone to Europe and really tested himself, so there could be no arguements.

There are 2 possibilities why Pele went to US :

1. Pele was a player in his prime who went to USA to test himself in the best league in the world.
2. Pele was a player in semi-retirement (35 years old) who went to US to make some $ by showing some amateurs how to play football.

Which one do you think it was ?

but when he did it was to some pub team league where he knew his scoring record would still be untouchable.

In fact, in his 3 years spent in US, Pele played 110 games and scored 64 goals. Very untouchable, indeed. I am sure that racking up 1000 goals was Pele's primary concern in NASL.

Show me where they beat those teams? I heard they beat Fiorentina but thats it. Anyway that is entirely different to playing them week in, week out in real competitons (Serie A, European Cup, UEFA Cup)... there is a lot more on the line in those kind of matches and Maradona was man enough to stand up to that challenge, as was Sivori, as was Di Stefano (in Spain).


In fact, Pele played 134 games and scored 147 goals against European clubs. That includes the likes of : Real Madrid, FC Barcelona, Milan, Inter, Benfica, Sporting, Feyenoord, Valencia, Atletico Madrid, Hamburg, Stade de Reims, Roma, Fiorentina, Juventus, etc.

(but lets not for a moment pretend his oposition were at the level of Europe's elite, where many of South America's best were playing already)...

Interesting. The usual european ego.
BTW, can you name the 3 most proeminent south-american players playing in Serie A and Primera Division in 1968 ?

The suggestion that Pele wasn't "man enough" to take the "european" challenge is freaking comical to say the least. In 1958, there was one brazilian player taking the road to Italy. His name was Altafini and he went to AC Milan. For 7 years, he will be Milan's top scorer and he will finish as the third highest top scorer in the history of Serie A (216 goals, joint with Meazza). He is also the holder of the highest scoring record in the European Cup (14 goals in 1962/1963). This Altafini dude was kicked out from the 1958 selecao by a 17 years old Pele, who always outscored him in Brazil. So, Altafini wasn't afraid of the "big bad wolves" from the european clubs, but Pele was ? :rolleyes:
And there is another interesting aspect. In 1962, when Brazil went to the WC, they had two players who were absolute stars in two of the best teams from Europe : Evaristo from FC Barcelona and that Altafini in AC Milan. Despite the fact that they have proven themselves against that so much superior opposition from Europe, none of them was called for that WC. There could be 2 reasons for that :

1. The brazilian federation was retarded.

2. The brazilian league was in fact at the highest level and the CBF was confident enough in the abilities of their home players, so that they felt no need to call upon the players from Europe.

Again the same question : which one do you think it was ?

And BTW, here are some results of the brazilian teams against european ones at that time :


Allow me to give you the results of Real Madrid versus brazilian teams at that time :

1952 - versus Botafogo : 2 - 2
versus Botafogo : 0 - 0
1955 : - Botafogo : 2 - 2
1956 : - Vasco Da Gama : 4 - 2
- Vasco da Gama : 5 - 2
- Vasco da Gama : 2 - 2
- Vasco da Gama : 0 - 2
1957 : - Recife : 5 - 3
- Vasco da Gama : 3 - 4
1959 : Santos : 5 - 3
1961 : Vasco da Gama : 2 - 2
1963 : FC Sao Paulo : 1 - 2
FC Sao Paulo : 0 - 0
1966 : Vasco da Gama : 0 - 0
Corinthians : 2 - 2
Corinthians : 1 - 1
1967 : Vasco da Gama : 6 - 1
1969 : Sao Paulo : 1 - 2
1975 : Palmeiras : 1 - 3
1976 : Cruzeiro : 2 - 0

Total : 9 draws, 6 victories, 5 defeats

And we are talking about Real Madrid here.

Results of brazilian teams in the Trofeo Carranza :

1965 : Real Zaragoza - Flamengo 3 - 0
Flamengo - Betis 3 - 0
1966 : Real Zaragoza - Corinthians 2 - 0
1969 : Palmeiras - Atletico Madrid 1 - 1
1972 : Benfica - Botafogo 3 - 0
Botafogo - Bayern Munchen 4 - 2
1974 : Palmeiras - FC Barcelona 2 - 0
Palmeiras - Espanyol 2 - 1
1975 : Palmeiras - Real Zaragoza 1 - 0
1976 : Athletic - Palmeiras 2 - 1
1977 : Atletico - Vasco da Gama 3 - 0
Vasco da Gama - Cadiz 5 - 3
1979 : Flamengo - FC Barcelona 2 - 1
1980 : Flamengo - Betis 2 - 1

Total : 5 defeats, 8 victories, 1 draw

Results of brazilian teams in the Tournoi de Paris (one of the most prestigious ones at the moment) :

1957 : Vasco da Gama - RC Paris 2 - 1
1958 : Bolton Wanderers - Flamengo 1 - 1
1959 : Fortuna Dusseldorf - Vasco da Gama 2 - 1
Vasco da Gama - AC Milan 2 - 1
1960 : Santos - Stade de Reims 5 - 3
Santos - RC Paris 4 - 1
1961 : Santos - RC Paris 5 - 4
Santos - Benfica 6 - 3
1962 : RC Paris - Santos 3 - 2
1963 : Botafogo - Anderlecht 1 - 0
Botafogo - RC Paris 3 - 2
1964 : Borussia Dortmund - Santos 3 - 1
Stade de Reims - Santos 1 - 1

Total : 8 victories, 2 draws, 3 defeats

Naranja trophy :

1959 : Santos - Valencia 4 - 4
Santos - Inter 7 - 1
1961 : Valencia - Botafogo 3 - 2
FC Barcelona - Botafogo 3 - 2
1964 : Flamengo - Valencia 3 - 1

Total : 2 victories, 2 defeats, 1 draw

Total record for brazilian sides : 13 draws, 24 victories, 15 defeats

As you can see, the boys from Europe don't have a positive record against the brazilians.

[JumpinJackFlash]

Interesting. The usual european ego.
BTW, can you name the 3 most proeminent south-american players playing in Serie A and Primera Division in 1968 ?How is it European ego? When I'm arguing that Diego Maradona, a South American, is better than another South American Pele. Its well known that many South American players even then moved to Spain and Italy (and still continue to do so to this day). The majority of South America's best players have gone to Europe because they know that the European Cup is THE most prestigious competition a player can hope to win at club level. Is that Eurosnob egotism or just stating the obvious?

To answer your question, I'll list some of the South Americans who had the balls to play in Europe, during the time in which Pele stayed in Brazil...
Alfredo Di Stéfano - Real Madrid
Héctor Rial - Real Madrid
Amarildo - AC Milan
Rogelio Domínguez - Real Madrid
Evaristo - Barcelona
Omar Enrique Sívori - Juventus, Napoli
Cinesinho - Juventus
José Altafini - AC Milan, Napoli, Juventus
Angelo Sormani - Roma, Milan
Jair da Costa - Binter
Dino da Costa - Roma
Alcides Ghiggia - Roma
Pedro Waldemar Manfredini - Roma
Luís Vinício - Napoli
Faustino Jarbas Canè - Napoli
Didi - Real Madrid
Juan Alberto Schiaffino - AC Milan
Cayetano Ré - Barcelona
Hugo Sotil - Barcelona
Ernesto Grillo - AC Milan
Benítez - Barcelona
Antonio Angelillo - Binter
Humberto Maschio - Bologna

Your point about Altafini ignored the Di Stefano/Sivori arguement who were considered amongst the world's elite and Di Stefano is commonly cited as a contender for "THE" greatest player of all time.

Lets take Pele's FIFA 100 of still living for example and look at the other highly rated South Americans since and if they followed the same thought patern that moving away to compete in Europe is important.

Gabriel Batistuta - Fiorentina, Roma, Binter
Hernán Crespo - Parma, Lazio, Binter, Chelsea, Milan
Alfredo Di Stéfano - Real Madrid, Espanyol
Mario Kempes - Valencia
Diego Maradona - Napoli, Barcelona, Sevilla
Daniel Passarella - Fiorentina, Binter
Javier Saviola - Barcelona, Madrid, Sevilla, Monaco
Omar Sivori - Juventus, Napoli
Juan Sebastián Verón - Sampdoria, Parma, Lazio, Man Utd, Chelsea, Binter
Javier Zanetti - Binter
Cafu - Roma, Milan, Real Zaragoza
Falcão - Binter, Roma
Júnior - Torino, Pescara
Rivaldo - Deportivo, Barcelona, Milan, Olympiacos, AEK Athens
Romário - PSV, Barcelona, Valencia
Ronaldinho - PSG, Barcelona
Ronaldo - PSV, Barcelona, Binter, Madrid, Milan
Sócrates - Fiorentina
Zico - Udinese
Iván Zamorano - St Gallen, Sevilla, Madrid, Binter
Carlos Valderrama - Montpellier, Real Valladolid
Teófilo Cubillas - Basel, Porto
Romerito - Barcelona

In fact, Pele played 134 games and scored 147 goals against European clubs. That includes the likes of : Real Madrid, FC Barcelona, Milan, Inter, Benfica, Sporting, Feyenoord, Valencia, Atletico Madrid, Hamburg, Stade de Reims, Roma, Fiorentina, Juventus, etc.Please show me a list of dates and competitions in which Pele's team BEAT sides such as Juventus, Milan, Madrid, Barceolna. Davide Gualtieri technically scored for San Marino against England, but it doesn't mean shi't considering his side went on to lose 7-1. As I said, I was aware that Santos beat Fiorentina, but the big teams I specifically mentioned? Seems highly suspect to me, as a Juventus fan I've never of Santos beating them with Pele.

I don't see what Flamenco drawing with Bolton in an almost friendly competition like environment, or other tinpot comps that Europeans don't take seriously has to do with this? I don't have anything against South American football, infact Argentine league is somwhat interesting to me... but lets not pretend they're regarded as more prestigious as Serie A or La Liga, thats crazy talk.

[gmonn]

It seems to me that this polarization between Pelé & Maradona is more a result of the rivalry between opposing generations than a genuine ultimate clash involving those who are supposed to be 'the two best players of all times'.


This political thinking may also be a reason why George Best has crept up to the top with many people. A way to get the British Isles into history at the creative end of the field.

Funny that we were able to see all of Pele, Cruyff, Beckenbauer, Muller, Best, and Carlos Alberto in the same US league when I was growing up. Cruyff played for my local team and was still great. I only wish to have seen Pele live in his prime.

[Tribune]

How is it European ego? When I'm arguing that Diego Maradona, a South American, is better than another South American Pele. Its well known that many South American players even then moved to Spain and Italy (and still continue to do so to this day). The majority of South America's best players have gone to Europe because they know that the European Cup is THE most prestigious competition a player can hope to win at club level. Is that Eurosnob egotism or just stating the obvious?


Eurosnob egotism and a huge one. And about how, it's because you seem to think that Europe always was the center of world football and a player has to play in Europe in order to be considered among the best.

The majority of South America's best players have gone to Europe because they know that the European Cup is THE most prestigious competition a player can hope to win at club level. Is that Eurosnob egotism or just stating the obvious?

You'll have to excuse me because I'm about to sin and refute the utter nonsense displayed in bold. Those south-american players who went to Europe did so because they could get better contracts there. How do you explain that top-class players from South-America signed for clubs who had almost zero chances of winning the European Cup ? Do you actually think that the likes of Maradona or Zico went to teams like Napoli and Udinese in the hope of winning the European Cup ? They went because there they got the biggest paycheck. Prior to the 90s, the south-americans didn't give a rat's ass about your precious european cup.

To answer your question, I'll list some of the South Americans who had the balls to play in Europe, during the time in which Pele stayed in Brazil...
Alfredo Di Stéfano - Real Madrid
Héctor Rial - Real Madrid
Amarildo - AC Milan
Rogelio Domínguez - Real Madrid
Evaristo - Barcelona
Omar Enrique Sívori - Juventus, Napoli
Cinesinho - Juventus
José Altafini - AC Milan, Napoli, Juventus
Angelo Sormani - Roma, Milan
Jair da Costa - Binter
Dino da Costa - Roma
Alcides Ghiggia - Roma
Pedro Waldemar Manfredini - Roma
Luís Vinício - Napoli
Faustino Jarbas Canè - Napoli
Didi - Real Madrid
Juan Alberto Schiaffino - AC Milan
Cayetano Ré - Barcelona
Hugo Sotil - Barcelona
Ernesto Grillo - AC Milan
Benítez - Barcelona
Antonio Angelillo - Binter
Humberto Maschio - Bologna


Sorry, but you did not answered my question. I asked you particularly about 1968. All you did is to list 23 names from a period of 20 years. Since you are at it, you may have added Julinho from Fiorentina, Canario and Santamaria from Real Madrid or Vava (had a 3-years spell at Atletico).
And there is a reasons why I asked you this, because after the decline of Di Stefano and Sivori, the best south-american players were playing in South-America. From 1963-1965 until Hugo Sotil in 1973, you would be hard pressed to find a SA player from an european club who could make into the first 10 in his continent.


Your point about Altafini ignored the Di Stefano/Sivori arguement who were considered amongst the world's elite and Di Stefano is commonly cited as a contender for "THE" greatest player of all time.


I mentioned only Altafini because I refered to one player who played in the same league as Pele, being always outplayed by him, and yet was hugely succesful in Italy. I don't see what relevance could Di Stefano and Sivori have for Pele, since they never played in the same competitions.

Lets take Pele's FIFA 100 of still living for example and look at the other highly rated South Americans since and if they followed the same thought patern that moving away to compete in Europe is important.

Gabriel Batistuta - Fiorentina, Roma, Binter
Hernán Crespo - Parma, Lazio, Binter, Chelsea, Milan
Alfredo Di Stéfano - Real Madrid, Espanyol
Mario Kempes - Valencia
Diego Maradona - Napoli, Barcelona, Sevilla
Daniel Passarella - Fiorentina, Binter
Javier Saviola - Barcelona, Madrid, Sevilla, Monaco
Omar Sivori - Juventus, Napoli
Juan Sebastián Verón - Sampdoria, Parma, Lazio, Man Utd, Chelsea, Binter
Javier Zanetti - Binter
Cafu - Roma, Milan, Real Zaragoza
Falcão - Binter, Roma
Júnior - Torino, Pescara
Rivaldo - Deportivo, Barcelona, Milan, Olympiacos, AEK Athens
Romário - PSV, Barcelona, Valencia
Ronaldinho - PSG, Barcelona
Ronaldo - PSV, Barcelona, Binter, Madrid, Milan
Sócrates - Fiorentina
Zico - Udinese
Iván Zamorano - St Gallen, Sevilla, Madrid, Binter
Carlos Valderrama - Montpellier, Real Valladolid
Teófilo Cubillas - Basel, Porto
Romerito - Barcelona


Ok. Let's take a look at the players before 1990, before the economical disparity between european clubs and the SA ones took proportions.

Alfredo Di Stefano - granted, he had an extremely succesful career in Europe.
Omar Sivori - the same.

Kempes - between 1971 and 1990 he played six years in South America and 12 years in Europe. He played for Valencia (1977-1981 and 1982-1984), Hercules (1984-1986), Vienna (1986-1987) and Sankt-Polten (1987-1990).
Daniel Passarella - he moved to Fiorentina when he was already 29 years old ; he plays 4 years there, then another 2 years in Inter, after he played his best football in River Plate ;
Junior - after 10 years in Flamengo, he moves to Torino at the age of 30 ; plays there 3 seasons, then he moves to Pescara for other 2 seasons ;
Socrates - after 10 years in Botafogo and Corinthians, he moves to Fiorentina at the age of 30 ; he stays one year there, then he turn back to Brazil ;
Zico - only 2 years in Udinese, also at 30 ;
Carlos Valderrama - played only 3 years in Europe, 2 in Montpellier, one in Valladolid ; he spent the rest of his career in Europe ;
Teofilo Cubillas - only 4 years in Europe, at FC Basel (1973-1974) and Porto (1974-1977).
Romerito - only one year in Europe at FC Barcelona ; the rest in South-America.

It seems that those south-americans didn't actually cared that much about the european cup or about Europe in general.

I left Falcao out for a specific reasons. I see that when you listed the european team which he played in there was a strange name there called Binter. I would assume you meant Inter. Well, you are a little bit confused. Before Roma, Falcao did not play for "Binter", aka Internazionale Milano. He played for Internacional Porto Alegre until 1980, when he moved to Roma. Maybe next time you'll mention players you actually know something about instead of just copying some lists from somewhere.

Anyway, since you seem to think that the majority of the best SA players had big careers in Europe, I'll give you examples of players who did not.

Jose Manuel Moreno - there are many old-timers who say that Moreno was better than Pele or Di Stefano. Unfortunately for him, he did not have the chance to play in a WC but you would be hard-pressed to find a SA fan who would not consider him a top 10 ever.

Angel Labruna - another genius from La Maquina in the forties ;

Walter Gomez - while you mentioned Schiaffino as a star in Serie A (although just as many others he went there at the dusk of his career, when he was already 29), Schiaffino was not even the best number 10 Uruguay had at that time. This honor was given to Walter Gomez who was playing in River Plate.

Adolfo Pedernera - rated as highly as Maradona or Di Stefano by those who saw him and that says a lot ; played with Moreno in River ;

Zizinho - the player whom Pele sought to emulate ; he would be remembered just as Pele or Didi if Brazil hadn't lost in 1950 ;

Ademir de Menezes - same as Zizinho.

Albert Pedro Spencer - quite unknown in Europe, he is all time top scorer of the Copa Libertadores, which he won thrice in 1960, 1961 and 1966 ; he scored 54 goals in this competition and he won the Intercontinental twice, beating Benfica's Eusebio and Real Madrid ; he was the best number 9 in the world after Eusebio in the 60s ;

Pepe - the highest top scorer in Santos history after Pele ; he scored more than 400 goals for them, he made the selecao twice, but Zagalo was prefered ;

Canhoteiro - while Zagalo and Pepe were Brazil's left wingers in 1958 and 1962, they were not the best what Brazil had at his position ; this honor belongs to Canhoteiro, the star of FC Sao Paulo in the 50s and considered by those who saw the best left-winger Brazil ever had ; together with Pele, Maradona, Best or Cruyff, Canhoteiro is one of the very few who can claim to have been Garrincha's dribbling equal. Unfortunately, he did not feature in a WC : in 1958, he had a bust with Feola and in 1962 was injured.

Luis Artime - a formidable argentinian scorer who was at his best between 1964 and 1972 ; his skill for being at the right place at the right time was incredible ; he was the argentinian Gerd Muller and the best number 9 Argentina had at that time ; never played in Europe ;

Roberto Dinamite - the highest scorer in the history of Brasileiro and the best brazilian striker in the late 70s and the early 80s. He scored 26 goals in 39 caps for Brazil. Probably the best striker in South-America at that time as well ;

Annibal Ciocca - exceptional inside forward from a legendary Nacional side between 1938-1942. He was nicknamed El Principe ;

Roberto Porta - Ciocca's partner in Nacional ; he also played in Independiente ;

Obdulio Varela - one of the greatest midfielders which ever existed and the main artisan of Uruguay's victory in 1950 ; he was one of the best players in the both WC from 1950 and 1954 ; Uruguay paid a heavy price for having him sidelined with injury against the magical magyars in 1954 ;

Silvio Marzolini - the best left back Argentina ever had ; played only in South America ;

Severino Varela - a legend in Penarol and Boca ;

Ademir da Guia - one of ther best number 10s in the late 60s and the 70s ; he did not make it into the selecao due to the inflation of top players at his position, having to compete with Pele, Rivelino or Tostao ; King Kong could give you first hand accounts on his exploits in Palmeiras ;

Ermindo Onega - take River games of the 60s and I don't need to explain anything. He was the best argentinian offensive midfielder after Sivori and he did not play in Europe ;

Pedro Rocha - serious contender for Onega as the best number 10 in south-america (outside Brazil) ; he was the backbone of the legendary Penarol side of the 60s and was equally brilliant for FC Sao Paulo in the 70s ;

Ricardo Bochini - well, I'm sure the argentinian fans like Moishe or ArgentinosSoccerFan, who saw him live, could give you detailed accounts. Probabbly the best argentinian offensive midfielder in the 70s ;

Juan Joya - one of the best wings in the world in the 60s ; played with Spencer in Penarol ;

And I left out the brazilian sides who played at WC, like Pele, Garrincha, Tostao, Djalma Santos, Nilton Santos, Rivelino, Gerson, Jairzinho, Carlos Alberto, Zito, etc.
And btw, Didi has no business with Europe. One, he stayed there only one year because he did not get along with Di Stefano. Two, he went there not because he was head over heels for european football, but because he wanted his daughters to be educated in Europe.

Please show me a list of dates and competitions in which Pele's team BEAT sides such as Juventus, Milan, Madrid, Barceolna. Davide Gualtieri technically scored for San Marino against England, but it doesn't mean shi't considering his side went on to lose 7-1. As I said, I was aware that Santos beat Fiorentina, but the big teams I specifically mentioned? Seems highly suspect to me, as a Juventus fan I've never of Santos beating them with Pele.


Well, that's not surprising, since you don't know nothing about Pele. Someone who can actually suggest that Pele's stay in NASL busted his goal record has absolutely no business discussing football history.
But if you ask : for instance, we can start with the Intercontinental Cup from 1963, when Santos beat Milan 4 - 2 and 1 - 0 in Maracana (without Pele, btw).
About Juve, it was on 18 June 1961, when Santos beat Juventus Torino with 2 - 0, with one goal from Pele. During the same period, Santos also beat Roma on 21 June 1961 with 5 - 0 and Internazionale on 24 June with 4 - 1. He scored twice against Roma and once against Internazionale.
The encounter with Barcelona took place on 28 June 1959 : Santos won 5 - 1, Pele scored twice.
The game against Madrid took place on 17 June 1959 : Santos lost 3 - 5, Pele scored once. For Santos the scorers were Pele, Coutinho and Pepe, for Madrid Puskas, Gento and Mateos (3 goals).

I don't see what Flamenco drawing with Bolton in an almost friendly competition like environment, or other tinpot comps that Europeans don't take seriously has to do with this? I don't have anything against South American football, infact Argentine league is somwhat interesting to me... but lets not pretend they're regarded as more prestigious as Serie A or La Liga, thats crazy talk.

Cut the bullshit. From those 52 games I listed, there were only TWO played against minnows. One against Bolton and one against Cadiz. Besides those, there are many games against Real Madrid, Atletico, Barcelona, Milan, Valencia, Inter, Stade de Reims, Borussia Dortmund. I was very curious if you would point one immediately to one of those and you did.

but lets not pretend they're regarded as more prestigious as Serie A or La Liga, thats crazy talk.

It would be useful for you to try to make the difference between "past" and "present". US Navy wasn't always the mightiest, you know...
Serie A and La Liga were not even the best european leagues for a period : in the seventies, they were behind Bundesliga and Premiership, who were dominating the European competitions at that time.

[Gregoriak]

Beckenbauer? he was solid and great team organizer, but was he "ultimate" and beautiful enough that it took your breath away? Definitely not! Maybe when he touches the ball there is a sigh of relief, but my top 11 can all dribble around players with relative ease and then some. Beckenbauer has great vision but not as flexible enough to run circles around other players with the ball, which is why I had forwards like Puskas, Garrincha, Sanchez and Romario in the list, they were not just shooters, they could mix it up. Muller was "a shoot from the hips striker" from what I understand and does not mix it up.

Anyway, they are my opinions, I just required the players ability to be flexible over a greater range of skill rather than a few before i would consider classifying them as close to an "Ultimate soccer player"

:cool:

Why are some people talking about players they obviously have no decent knowledge of? Beckenbauer "not flexible enough to run circles around other players with the ball"?

Okay, then watch this and hang your head in shame:

x_trYAWejQc

It also wouldn't harm if you'd watch this Beckenbauer compilation from the 1966 World Cup, when he rose to stardom at the age of 20:

7vBpsye61C0

[Tribune]

Why are some people talking about players they obviously have no decent knowledge of? Beckenbauer "not flexible enough to run circles around other players with the ball"?

Okay, then watch this and hang your head in shame:

x_trYAWejQc

Lol. I was wondering when you will show up, Gregoriak. :D

[Gregoriak]

I agree with virtually everything you have said expect that I would tend to have Beckenbeur as a forerunner of the Ultimate team player (or player's player) rather than Ultimate soccer Player which indicates all-round skill and gifted. If Beckenbeur had amazing enough football skill as the others on my list, he would no-doubt be running things from the midfield without the fear of losing the ball. If he was a CB and his team was up a few goals and he had the skill on those in the list then he would have taken the ball up from the back as he did countless times before but he would also start to run circles around the midfield opposition to show off his ability and wow the crowds. Sadly there is little of such facts and he knew his strengths and play it to his ability, but his discipline is for the team's defence above all else and hence less risk and less personal skill improvement that a quality midfielder and forward has freedom to work on. if Beckenbeur believed that he best contribution was with the defence and let others to cover the midfield or the midfielders were enough quality for him to work with that he was not need to runs thing there, then it somewhat indicates that he also knew that his weakness as well. He may have been a great CM and a great CM would contribute more to the team than a great SW or CB being able to transforms from either attack or defence in the middle of the park. However since we are talking about the ultimate soccer player, I'm afraid that being a SW or CB has its drawbacks and while Beckenbeur has the mark of the greatest defender or even greatest teamplayer (maybe even best postional player), he was not able to demostrate outside that. Usually your best player gets to do something in the middle of the park at the standard that we are talking about. Whereas much of my list has much written about their ability to defend with the same vigour as their teammates despite their usual position and get plenty of turnovers. Although it is harder to defend for forwards/midfielders to personally approach a player (in their position) possessed with the ball than for that player with ball approaching your defending position.

When I talk about ultimate soccer player, I think of what he is able to do with the ball as a playmaker who is in the position to have the option to either do things for himself or for his teammates, although what he does for himself at this level also does more for the team as well. Whereas players that does well for the team are limited to show what he able to do with the ball since it is naturally more unit organization rather than personal.

:cool:


Good heavens, you have absolutely no clue what a player Beckenbauer was. There are so many wrongs in your posts, I don't even know where to start. Basically your point is that Beckenbauer was not skilled enough to hang with your favorite players. Which only shows that you have absolutely no clue about Beckenbauer as a player.

If Beckenbeur had amazing enough football skill as the others on my list, he would no-doubt be running things from the midfield without the fear of losing the ball.

I wish you were on a wind-up but I fear you are serious with this assessment. Some basic information for you: Beckenbauer played as a central midfielder for Germany in a 4-3-3 in both the 1966 and the 1970 World Cups. He only played as a "center back" (as you wrongly put it, the historically correct term is libero, may have heard it before, it's Italian and basically hints at a player having no marking job in defense, allowing him to join the attacks frequently and in fact becoming a quasi-playmaker, just hanging very deep) in the 1974 World Cup. In 1966 and 1970 (please watch the YouTube clips I posted above for prove) he continuously did exactly what you say he had not enough skill for!

All I'm asking of people is, before they start to elaborate on subjects (provided they are not keen on making themselves look totally clueless)

TRY TO GET A BASIC KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUBJECT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

Hell.

[Gregoriak]

Lol. I was wondering when you will show up, Gregoriak. :D

It's the danger of checking out BigSoccer just for fun for a few minutes and then discovering gems like this. Now I spent 45 minutes checking and reading the last two pages of this thread while I only wanted to spent something like 10 minutes!