eXecutioner's Greatest Players Ranking System

[eXecutioner]

Hi guys i dont know if anyone here has tried but i decided to rank all these legendary players according to their greatness. By greatness i mean their ability to lead their team to championships as well playing a long career and personal achievements. The system i came up with gives points based upon total number of caps, goals, personal hardware, and team championships these players accumulated throughout their career. I wanted to use a scientific/mathematical formula to rank these players to see who is actually overrated/underrated. To keep it fair so that all players can be compared i divided them into 4 obvious categorizes: goalkeepers, defenders, midfielders, and strikers. The only thing that separates these categories is the points they receive per goal. So here is how i ranked them:

ACHIEVEMENT POINTS
Club Caps 1
Country Caps 3
World Cup Caps 5
Domestic Championships 40
Club Continental Champs. 70
Club Intercontinental Champs. 80
Country Continental Champs. 150
Country Intercontinental Champs. 150
World Cup Champs. 300
World Cup Golden Boot 100
World Cup Golden Ball 100
World Cup All-Star 50
International Golden Boot 100
International Player of Year 100
Domestic Player of Year 50
Domestic Golden Boot 50
More goals than caps 2/+goal

for Goalkeepers
World Cup Clean Sheet 8
Goal (all goals treated the same) 12

for Defenders
Club Goal 8
Country Goal 10
World Cup Goal 12

for Midfielders
Club Goal 4
Country Goal 6
World Cup Goal 10

for Striekrs
Club Goal 2
Country Goal 4
World Cup Goal 8

Right off the bat there are some obvious short-comings to this system. Not all information is available about all the players which may skew the actual ranking. This is true, but for most of the well-known players from each country enough information is available to make this a viable system. Also this system focuses on the ability of the player to win anything and does not take into context the team that was around the player or rank the competitions. Championships are categorized according to domestic, continental, and intercontinental for both club and nation. I am not interested in ranking the championships which play on the same level, for instance a Copa America is weighed the same as an European Championship because their are both continental. I did this to keep the playing field level for players who played at big clubs and ones who were stuck at small clubs.

The emphasis is on winning. The players who won more championships and trophies are considered "greater" than the ones with lots of ability or great statistics. That is why a player like Pele is considered the greatest ever because he not only had a long career, many goals, but the winning of 32 team championships put him way over the top of other players like Di Stefano who many individual awards and had great statistics.

So here are the results of the 24 players i have already done. Please posts your suggestions as to how this can be improved and also your comments on the idea and try it yourself to see where your favorite player ranks. I realize this might not be the most accurate way to rank these players but its worth a shot. :D


Rank Country Name Position Total Points
1 Brazil Pele ST 5,601
2 Brazil Zico M 5,470
3 Argentina Maradona M 4,786
4 Arg./Spain Di Stefano ST 4,486
5 W. Germany Gerd Muller ST 4,416
6 Portugal Eusebio ST 4,289
7 Netherlands Cruyff M 3,954
8 Hungary Puskas ST 3,839
9 W. Germany Matthaus M 3,836
10 France Platini M 3,718
11 W. Germany Beckenbauer D 3,677
12 England Bobby Charlton M 3,547
13 Italy Maldini D 3,530
14 Brazil Ronaldo ST 3,369
15 France Zidane M 3,302
16 Brazil Garrincha ST 2,891
17 Hungary Kocsis ST 2,746
18 Argentina Passarella D 2,603
19 Netherlands Rijkaard M 2,397
20 Brazil Didi M 2,228
21 England Bobby Moore D 2,181
22 N. Ireland George Best M 2,110
23 Italy Baresi D 2,043
24 Netherlands Krol D 1,952

I started with Maradona and Pele first and i wasn't at all surprised with the results until i did one of the last ones which was Zico. When the numbers added all up i was shocked he knocked Maradona out of 2nd place.
I got most of the statistical information from player profiles shared on this forum, Wikipedia, PlanetWorldCup and of course googled any other various info i needed. I am going to do more players and i guess we'll see if there are any more surprises. Post the ones you did and i will add them.

[milivella]

Hi eXecutioner, your ranking system is interesting. However, I think it has some flaws:

You use subjective judgments. Subjective awards (golden ball, all star, player of the year), but so you're using rankings to produce a ranking. And subjective judgments about positions, but many players are between midfielders and strikers.
I bet that, when you'll compute more players, not-so-great players will be ahead of great players.
You can't be sure that you have the definitive - let's say - top 10 until you have computed hundreds of players.
Domestic championships should have different weights (you are aware of this): it's not the same to win a title in Italy or in Japan.
As you say, "[this system] does not take into context the team that was around the player"

I have elaborated a different method that doesn't have these problems. I'll give a quick description of it, then I'll write down the ranking it produces for the years 1958-1994, and finally I'll show why my method overcomes the flaws of your system.

Here is the method:

1. Points to a team

4 points to the national team that, at the end of the World Cup, is 1st in the Elo ranking.
2 points to the national team that wins the European Cup, only if it, at the end of the competition, is 1st in the (world) Elo ranking.
1 point to the club team that wins the European Champions Cup.

2. Team's points to a player (or two)

First of all, compute who is the player with more titles in his career, assigning 4x to WC win, 2x to WC final and EC/CA, 1x to WC semifnal and ECC. If more than one player have the same titles, pick the player who scored more goals in his career.
Then, if this is not the top scorer of the team, give 2/3 of the team's points to him, and 1/3 to the top scorer.
Otherwise, give all the points to the top scorer.

Here is the ranking computed by this method:
1. Pele (8 points)
2. Beckenbauer (6)
3. Di Stefano (5)
4.-8. Garrincha, Maradona, Puskas, Rivelino, Zico (4)
9. R.Charlton (3.7)
10.-12. Cruijff, Muller, Platini (3)
13.-15. Neal, Matthaus, Van Basten (2.7)

And now, let's see if this method has the same flaws of yours:

There is no subjective judgment, only objective data.
There is no not-so-great player other than Neal.
The complete top 15 ranking is computed in minutes.
[I consider only the top competition for every level: world, continent (national teams) and continent (club).]
A player can win two world cups but still have no points, if a teammate is more important.


Still, I think your method is better than mine in some aspects:

My method only works for the top 15-20 players all-time, yours could be used for thousands of players.
My method can't be used in "real time" (I can't rank players after 1994, because they're still active), while yours can give an up-to-date ranking.


So, I hope you'll improve your interesting method. If I'll have some ideas that could help you, be sure I'll write them down :)

[Cirdan]

Romario should be pretty high on that list, should have nearly 2000 pts on goals and matches alone, his assorted trophys should also be worth another 1500 pts or so... might even break into your top 10. But I'm too lazy now to exactly figure out which of his goals should count how many points and which titles are worth something ;)

for goals, see also:

http://www.rsssf.com/players/prolific.html#romario

[Catel]

Hadn't Zidane been injured in 2002, he'd be ranked much higher... ! :o

[eXecutioner]

great stuff milivella, like i said i am trying to make the playing field even for everyone so that the players can all be compared. Even still its going to be hard to compare a great goalkeeper with a great striker because there are just so many more ways for a striker to earn points than a goalkeeper. I've considered uping the points give per cap to a goallie but then i thought about it and it doesn't make sense because a all players get the same opportunity with their cap/game. It's incredibily hard to devise a system where all players have a fair shot, that is why i did not place value on goals and much more value on awards and championships.

Ranking championships from Italy higher than ones from Japan might seem like a good idea but that again is a judgement call. In my eyes, for the purpose of this, i wanted to rank all championships the same if they played on the same level (domestic, continental, intercont.). Think about it, would it not be unfair for the great players, like some Eastern European players, that were not allowed to leave their country to play abroad? Why should they only get 2 points for winning their championships when a Western European player gets 4 for winning their domestic championship? Is it their fault that they won everything they could? No of course not. Same thing with cups. Where do you even begin to compare and rank cups? In the early 40's-60's Europe and Brazil constantly changed the names of their tournaments, its insane trying to figure out which one was tougher than the other. Anyway you made some good points and i will deffinately try to come up with a way to make even more fair for goalkeepers and defenders to make it to the top of list if they deserve it.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

Hadn't Zidane been injured in 2002, he'd be ranked much higher... ! :o

Any best player ranking that includes Zidane within the top 250 or so players is ultimately flawed.

[phil80]

Any best player ranking that includes Zidane within the top 250 or so players is ultimately flawed.
Alright this takes the cake for the most ridiculous thing that i've ever read on BigSoccer.

[Twix]

Any best player ranking that includes Zidane within the top 250 or so players is ultimately flawed.

I can totally understand him not making the top 50 but 250?

Come on, man. I think even you would struggle to back that up.

[phil80]

I can totally understand him not making the top 50 but 250?

Come on, man. I think even you would struggle to back that up.
He can't, his player rankings are so bias, he has lost the ability to rate accurately.

[eXecutioner]

Any best player ranking that includes Zidane within the top 250 or so players is ultimately flawed.

well now i agree he is a bit overrated especially when he won the 50 greatest in 50 years, but to say that he is not on the top 250 in anything is absolutely a ridiculous statement. You know considering there have been less than 250 players to ever score a goal in a World Cup Final game...

[Teso Dos Bichos]

Alright this takes the cake for the most ridiculous thing that i've ever read on BigSoccer.

Not at all. It's also a ridiculous statement to make considering most of your 'contributions'.

I can totally understand him not making the top 50 but 250?

Come on, man. I think even you would struggle to back that up.

I have already, off the top of my head, posted a list of 50 odd better players from the last decade in a previous discussion. If I can do that then reaching the magical 250 mark when I extend it to the entire history of the game would be easy. The latter is something I have still to finish but work has been a right bitch recently.

He can't, his player rankings are so bias, he has lost the ability to rate accurately.

More inane rambling. Come back to me when you can actually refute anything I post in a sensible and contructive manner.

well now i agree he is a bit overrated especially when he won the 50 greatest in 50 years, but to say that he is not on the top 250 in anything is absolutely a ridiculous statement. You know considering there have been less than 250 players to ever score a goal in a World Cup Final game...

See above. Plus what does scoring in a single match have to do with player quality? Apologies for your thread being taken somewhat off course but Zidane fans really need a reality check unless they specifically admit that their views on him are based entirely on aesthetics.

[phil80]

Not at all. It's also a ridiculous statement to make considering most of your 'contributions'.



I have already, off the top of my head, posted a list of 50 odd better players from the last decade in a previous discussion. If I can do that then reaching the magical 250 mark when I extend it to the entire history of the game would be easy. The latter is something I have still to finish but work has been a right bitch recently.



More inane rambling. Come back to me when you can actually refute anything I post in a sensible and contructive manner.



See above. Plus what does scoring in a single match have to do with player quality? Apologies for your thread being taken somewhat off course but Zidane fans really need a reality check unless they specifically admit that their views on him are based entirely on aesthetics.
Your inability to comprehend all your ridiculous posts that have been constantly refuted is of no fault but yours. Why dont you contribute something useful and list at the very least 200 players that have been better than him. Otherwise quit ruining every thread with your useless drivel.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

Yet more inane rambling and irrelevance. You need to take a leaf out of your own book. My posts stand up to any and all scrutiny, which is no doubt why you didn't even bother to try.

[Perú FC]

Any best player ranking that includes Zidane within the top 250 or so players is ultimately flawed.
Isn't a great joke, but it's a good effort :D.

I think these type of lists only can verifying that maths are insufficient to measuring rankings in football.

[babaorum]

Any best player ranking that includes Zidane within the top 250 or so players is ultimately flawed.

Take a rest and a valium :rolleyes:

[Twix]

I have already, off the top of my head, posted a list of 50 odd better players from the last decade in a previous discussion. If I can do that then reaching the magical 250 mark when I extend it to the entire history of the game would be easy. The latter is something I have still to finish but work has been a right bitch recently.


I've read the top 50 that you're talking and I think around 25-30 of your names are pretty easy to dismiss IIRC. Dude, I'm no fan of Zidane but there's nothing to be lost by saying he's a great player, thug or otherwise. He definitely wouldn't make my top 50 of all time but I'm sure I could find a place for him in my top 100.

When you finish your top 250, be sure to post it, it'll make for some interesting reading

[phil80]

Yet more inane rambling and irrelevance. You need to take a leaf out of your own book. My posts stand up to any and all scrutiny, which is no doubt why you didn't even bother to try.
Exactly, i knew you would not be able to list those players, i'm not surprised.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

Let me know when you reach your fourth birthday. :rolleyes:

[phil80]

As usual, resorting to immature attacks rather than answering the question at hand, and that's why nobody takes your posts seriously.

If you are going to make such a foolish statement which everyone has disagreed with then you will have to back it up. Since you are incapable of doing so, then stop your foolish rant and let the thread stay back on topic.

[milivella]

Ranking championships from Italy higher than ones from Japan might seem like a good idea but that again is a judgement call.

Why? There are many efforts to give an objective rating to different leagues' level. See e.g.
http://www.iffhs.de/?3ccdc42ec70a294b4cd433c4e30e
http://paginas.terra.com.br/esporte/estmatfut/mathrank.htm#24

Think about it, would it not be unfair for the great players, like some Eastern European players, that were not allowed to leave their country to play abroad? Why should they only get 2 points for winning their championships when a Western European player gets 4 for winning their domestic championship? Is it their fault that they won everything they could?

More difficult competitions are more difficult also because no team wins them every time, while this is more likely to happen in less difficult competitions: so, it seems to me more fair to give more weight to Italy than to - let's say- Latvia. I.e. even if you want to give the same points to the player that won more Italian leagues and to the player that won more Romanian leagues, you have to give different weights:
- Italy: record is 8 titles (e.g. Giiuseppe Furino)
- Latvia: record is 13 titles (e.g. Mihalis Zemlinskis)
so, even in this scenario, a Latvian title should weight 0.6 Italian titles.

[This is a too simple example, because Spain league would be easy too, because Gento won 12 titles. You should consider not only the record holder. More, I still think that it's silly to give the same weight to Italy and Latvia.]

---

When I tried to think a method with premises similar to yours (x points for appearances, y points for goals, etc.), the best thing I came up with is this simple method: 1 point for every appearance in World Cup, 1 point for every goal in World Cup. This gives the following top 22:

1. RONALDO
2. MATTHAEUS Lothar
3. LATO Grzegorz
4. MARADONA Diego, SEELER Uwe
6. KLINSMANN Juergen, RUMMENIGGE Karl-Heinz
8. MUELLER Gerd
9. BAGGIO Roberto, PELE, JAIRZINHO
12. KEMPES Mario, KLOSE Miroslav
14. BECKENBAUER Franz, CUBILLAS Teofilo, MALDINI Paolo, ROSSI Paolo, VOELLER Rudi
19. BATISTUTA Gabriel, LINEKER Gary, OVERATH Wolfgang, RIVALDO
ZMUDA Wladyslaw

It's objective, it's complete, you have no problem with weights. But it can be used for few players (less than 5000 players have at least 1 appearance in WC), and above all, there are some missing players: even considering since sixties, Bobby Charlton is 66th, Cruijff is 278th, Eusebio is 80th, Platini and Zico are 38th, Zoff is 56th. Still, I think it can be a benchmark for your method: try to do better than this! :)