[Triton]

Originally Posted by Real Ray

Winning a WC changes a lot for him and his place in history. It's just a basic idea that without Maradona, Argentina is not in the final and that clears a path for Germany in 1986.

Without Maradona, Rummenigge would have indeed got a great opportunity to expand his already great legacy by playing well in that tournament. The important thing is that with Maradona's absolute absence, that cup wouldn't have produced a single great star above the rest. So, with Platini being injured and Zico past his prime, if used well, Rummenigge could be the replacing Maradona as the greatest player in Mexico.

[Twenty26Six]

Originally Posted by lanman

Another question to ask is where does Argentina's standing in world football end up without Maradona? Without him, they've only got one win at home and a runner up at the 1930 tournament - would they then be looked on like England as great under-achievers?

Similar to Portugal, England, and Spain, I would think - which, when you think about it, might not be that far removed from where they are seen by younger fans right now.

[Antonio81]

Originally Posted by Triton

Without Maradona, Rummenigge would have indeed got a great opportunity to expand his already great legacy by playing well in that tournament. The important thing is that with Maradona's absolute absence, that cup wouldn't have produced a single great star above the rest. So, with Platini being injured and Zico past his prime, if used well, Rummenigge could be the replacing Maradona as the greatest player in Mexico.

It more than likely would have been Lineker. Was the top scorer with 6 goals, and considering England lost to Maradona´s two goals, could have gone further where he undoubtedly would have scored more.

[Gregoriak]

Rummenigge was plagued by an injury in 1986, too.

If Brazil had not won the '58 World Cup, which country would have been most likely to? France or Sweden? Or a different one?

[Cool Rob]

Originally Posted by Excape Goat

And without Pele and the execitment in the US during the early 1970's,

The US simply would not have all those "Pele's children" playing soccer in 1976 and by 1996, the number of good American players would be smaller.

Perhaps, no Bigsoccer.com.

LOL. I'm on Big Soccer because my dad was a big Pele fan in the 1970's.

If Pele never existed, three things come to mind:

1) The Brazilian National Team Style and Racial Dynamic
In the 1950's Brazil had a significant inferiority complex vis a vis Europe, with serious questions about how a Brazilian style could win the World Cup. The 1950 WC final loss in the Maracana was a national nightmare. The 1954 Battle of Berne loss to Hungary was a disgrace, maybe the most violent WC game in history. Brazil was always close but it never worked out, not unlike Spain’s “choke” reputation.

Unfortunately with Brazil, this fragility also had a deep and ugly racial component to it as well. Lots of internal questions about the racial thing; the Black goalkeeper Barbosa was blamed for the 1950 loss to Uruguay, haunting him until his death. In a country of great racial diversity, black players got much of the blame. Pele changes not only the competitive dynamic but along with Didi, the racial dynamic as well, becoming the face of President Kubitschek’s “New Brazil.”

So what if Pele didn’t exist? The “world’s favorite team” and the Brazilian national style would not have developed the same way. It would still be unique, but its growth would have been greatly curtailed- possibly Brazil would have looked to more European tactics in the early 1960’s instead of developing its 4-2-4 and 4-3-3 systems. That would have sucked.

2) US
Without Pele’s NY days, US soccer is 15 years behind. Without Pele’s NASL the growth of AYSO and grassroots soccer is slowed. I don’t think the US gets the 1994 WC, which of course, led to MLS. And obviously no BigSoccer.com.

3) England
Without Pele England becomes a dominant world team. They win the 1966 and 1970 WCs. Hence they get an automatic entry into 1974 WC- and the 1970’s and 80’s are much different for England.

[JamesBH11]

If Pele and Maradona never existed?

Either Garrincha or Ronaldo will become GOD in football skillwise! Garrincha was not very well broacasted worldwide back then, .... So .... Reality- Cruijff and Ronaldo will be absolute top2

Zico would look much better and not so underated per se ... even he missed the WC82

Brazil might not win WC58, but was still won WC70 I think

Both Muller and Romario's 1000goals will be like top record

Rummenigge would be ranked higher surely

Ronaldinho would be new "fenomeno" .... (if we had never seen Maradona)

Messi and CRonaldo would look more "overated " than present

... bla bla llll

[comme]

Originally Posted by Gregoriak

Rummenigge was plagued by an injury in 1986, too.

If Brazil had not won the '58 World Cup, which country would have been most likely to? France or Sweden? Or a different one?

Half serious, but could Wales have done it? They only lost 1-0 to Brazil via Pele's goal. John Charles might have come back if they made the semi-final. Could they then have made it to the final and beyond?

[Excape Goat]

World Cup 1958

Brazil still had Nilton Santos, Vava, Didi, Garrincha, DJ Santos and Bellini. I still believed that José Altafini/Mazzola would have filled parts of Pele's shoes. He already scored 2 goals. Brazil was talented enough to win it, given it's a weakened World Cup.

Besides, Brazil played the first two games without Pele. The third match of their group was not decisive for Brazil because of the result from the England-Austria match. Brazil still had 3 points and a good enough goal difference to go through. However, it was decisive for the Soviets. If the result of the Brazil-Soviet Union game altered slightly, there won't be the playoff game between the Soviet Union and England. Then, the Soviets did not have to play 3 games in 5 days. They might be able to beat the aging Swedish team in the 2nd round. They might be able to march onward to the Final.

Or perhaps, the Soviet qualified ahead of Brazil and went onward to play Wales.

[JamesBH11]

Originally Posted by Excape Goat

World Cup 1958

Brazil still had Nilton Santos, Vava, Didi, Garrincha, DJ Santos and Bellini. I still believed that José Altafini/Mazzola would have filled parts of Pele's shoes. He already scored 2 goals. Brazil was talented enough to win it, given it's a weakened World Cup.

Besides, Brazil played the first two games without Pele. The third match of their group was not decisive for Brazil because of the result from the England-Austria match. Brazil still had 3 points and a good enough goal difference to go through. However, it was decisive for the Soviets. If the result of the Brazil-Soviet Union game altered slightly, there won't be the playoff game between the Soviet Union and England. Then, the Soviets did not have to play 3 games in 5 days. They might be able to beat the aging Swedish team in the 2nd round. They might be able to march onward to the Final.

Or perhaps, the Soviet qualified ahead of Brazil and went onward to play Wales.

You were right BUT, that will only emphasis the importance of Pele in the team.

Pele despite of being injured (not fully recovered) and despite of being only 17yrs old was brought to the team - Brazil were always full of stars not like other countries per se. So, he was "forced " to sit out first 2 games. When the coach felt he could try Pele in 3rd game to see his fitness ... (safety) the BOUM .... there a greatest player was born in front of millions people ...

[621380]

wc 1958...in the quarterfinals there was 3 teams playing with advantage(france,brasil,sweden),3 teams playing with disadvantage(wales,north ireland ,sovietunion) and 2 teams (germany,yugoslavia) without advantage and without disadavantage...

teams wales,sovietunion and north ireland have played a extra playoffmatch (3 games total in a timespan of 5 days)..sovietunion olso has played 30 extraminutes in this playoffgame.....

this playoffgame rule has affected negative some teams in the quarterfinals and has affected positive some other teams..

in my opinion the playoffgame rule was not the best rule.....