I agree. At least best right wing-back. The Cafu/Djalma Santos/Carlos Alberto fans insist he's not in the same class as them though. I don't know. I think those three have such an established reputation, I don't know what a Brazilian RB has to do to get in the club.
Well, they need to win the World Cup basically. In fairness he hasn't been nearly as good at national level.
I wonder how that spells out in detail (leaving confederation cups aside?). He was good/very good at the 2007 Copa America for sure, which they won. Assist and goal in the final against Argentina, 3-0 win. At the 2010 World Cup he was a bench player behind Maicon, as with 2009CC too. 2014 World Cup wasn't good (although his left-back colleague Marcelo was clearly worse than him imho). 2015 Copa America was good I think, for ex. against Colombia IIRC where he was a driving force moving forward. Generally I see that his defensive stats (tackles, interceptions, fouls committed) appear to skyrocket for the national team in most tournaments. Because he plays for a less dominant/superior side. Still had 2 assists in 4 games in the 2015 Copa America. 2016 CA wasn't good for the Brazil team, they only won against Haiti where Alves had two assists, in 2011 CA he only played and started two matches. I think by 2011 it was a mistake to still place Maicon ahead of him. 2007 Copa America the best individually, followed by 2015 Copa America probably. The U-23 Olympics and Confederations Cup aside, the 2007 Copa America is the last major trophy for Brazil. 2009 Confederations Cup semi final, free kick goal 4 minutes before end
I was thinking a bit further about it but essentially as a 'legendary' national team right back you need to play, in the national team, with a top-25 all timer (top 25 in most lists, that is). Not just Brazil but virtually all national teams. Dani Alves came in the post-Ronaldo era (post-Cafu too ofc), and now is maybe the Neymar era. Neymar is 24 years old, Dani Alves 33 years old. In 2011 Neymar was possibly still too young (to carry an attack really on his own, as far as that's possible in football); 2014 was the next chance and there Dani Alves himself was already 31. It's not certain Neymar will reach top 30 status, but a nod above Ronaldinho, Rivaldo is very well possible. Anyway, that is not so important; it is that there was a gap between the 'Ronaldo era' and the 'Neymar era'. Despite his age, Neymar has already wasted some years and possibilities because of chaos/'underdevelopment' and injury.
In that case, Lahm should easily be considered on the same level as Cafu/Santos/Alberto. After all, Lahm has both captained Germany to World Cup glory and captained Bayern to the treble. Interestingly enough, no one uses Zanetti or even Maldini's lack of international success as an argument against them being among the best fullbacks of all time. Today's players are simply judged by much higher standards than those of the past.
Well, Cafu his stock really rose enormously near the end of his career. It has been discussed a bit on this board, that his status suddenly increased at the end of his career (without a 'big' trophy as impetus). Cafu was thought of a (possible) weak link before the 1998 World Cup (source: e.g. Tim Vickery - it is really true) but turned out to be a strong performer. I'm not sure whether Lahm was really at his best at the 2014WC and reached heights that Cafu reached in 2002 and the 1994 final cameo. Carlos Alberto Torres has the bonus of being part of 'the best team ever', playing there pretty well and with style (generally an excellent technique), that goal, and what he did after his playing career. But most of all he has that goal and was captain of the 'best team ever'. Also he was pretty much at his best in the tournament. Zanetti is a similar case as Cafu in terms of 'status bump', and Maldini is sometimes thought of as one of the best defensive performances in 1994 (although he should've been sent off). That the final ended scoreless wasn't his fault. Brazil didn't score and that is what mattered for a defender.
Lahm made the all-star team in every World Cup he played in. I do not recall a single mistake he made in the entire 2014 tournament. He was excellent going forward and flawless at the back. His performance against Brazil in the semi-final is one of the best performances I've ever seen from a fullback in the World Cup. Lahm is a genius, he just doesn't have the propaganda machine behind him that older legends have.
Yes, but the method has changed a lot over time, so in theory it is hard to compare it with even 20 years before. For ex. in 1994 journalists were voting (other methods are a somewhat secretive technical committee or an online fan vote like in 2010; or a very select group of journalists). With regards to the 2014 World Cup I agree he was very good against Brazil but other than that I don't think he showed his usual level there. I remember comme saying such comment too and I agree. https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Brazil-lose-to-Germany-in-the-2014-World-Cup-semifinal That's not true, almost certainly. It played a part in why his position changed, as he was underwhelming against e.g. Ghana and Algeria in a central midfield position. I do remember him being somewhat more error prone in passing and dynamics as his other midfield colleagues. Why changing the position of a flawless player? I know it is only one source (didn't look further) but: http://metro.co.uk/2014/06/22/why-philipp-lahms-off-day-caused-germany-to-wobble-4771105/ Certainly also he made mistakes (as other full backs). Either way, Maldini did not win the World Cup but I think it's his 1994WC performance that is remembered, including keeping Brazil scoreless in the final. Maldini had virtually no weak point; I agree with e.g. the discussion on pesstatsdatabase that Lahm could be in face-to-face, one-on-one situations somewhat shaky (vs Portugal 2012). Of course, often those situations are avoided and prevented before they can take place. 'Genius' is personally such an exclusive claim that I wouldn't use it for any of the discussed full-backs, but that's me. I feel true geniuses aren't full-backs, with all respect (sweepers... yes, less than a handful possibly could be described as genius). But OK, that is also a semantic discussion, and what boxes an athlete should tick to be a genius. It's both the World Cup and the tournament performance that has delivered Carlos Alberto, Djalma Santos and Cafu their status. Personally I think Carlos Alberto has the least convincing case vs a recently retired Zanetti or Lahm, and also Dani Alves.
That's because he was being played out of position and Low is tactically inept (has always been). Why play a natural fullback as a CM? You wouldn't play Cafu in that position, Lahm makes just as little sense. Lahm was excellent for Germany whenever he played as fullback. Pep Guardiola said that Lahm is the most intelligent player he has ever worked with, and he's worked with Xavi, Iniesta and Messi. There's that. Another fullback (often played as center-back) who I always thought was very underrated - Lillian Thuram. An absolute monster defensively and was good going forward as well. I rate Lahm and Thuram as two of the very best fullbacks I've ever seen. For some reason neither have the hype around them that someone like Roberto Carlos did.
That phrase in itself doesn't say everything, because there are different types and applications of 'intelligence'. Doesn't it require - in some way - a higher type of intelligence to play in the middle of the park? In particular the central midfield and attacking midfield areas where you're surrounded by opposition players. You'd think so if you read Guardiola his own words: https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...andres-iniesta-barcelona-tactics-book-extract Example from that article (in addition to other sections): Guardiola: "There are footballers who are very good playing on the outside but don’t know what to do inside. Then there are players who are very good inside but don’t have the physique, the legs, to go outside. Andrés has the ability to do both. When you’re out on the touchline, like a winger, it is easier to play. You see everything: the mess, the crowd, the activity is all inside. When you play inside, you don’t see anything in there because so much is happening in such a small space and all around you. You don’t know where the opposition is going to come at you from, or how many of them. Great footballers are those who know how to play in both of those environments. Andrés doesn’t only have the ability to see everything, to know what to do, but also the talent to execute it; he’s able to break through those lines. He sees it and does it." 'Genius' is an overused word. As good as Lahm and Maldini were, they are no Maradona. As I said (but that's personal) I'm somewhat more tempted to use it for some sweepers as the 'revolutionary' Baresi or Beckenbauer in the past. To me Dani Alves and Lahm have separated themselves as the best right-backs of the past generation, and indeed that has also something to do with the clubs they played for. It's my feeling that Dani Alves is in some circles thumbed down, while the local boy and captain Lahm is sometimes turned into something bigger. It's right that Lahm his national team career is regarded as better. With the possible exception of euro 2012 (by for ex. dudes as Honigstein) it is often highlighted as a sea of consistency. Simply put: Dani Alves is sometimes stereotyped as sideline runner who cannot defend, and with a poor national team career. In truth, he has shown the ability to tuck inside and play in the half-spaces during the 2nd half of his Barcelona career, with actually having tangible duties in maintaining possession. He also had typically huge spaces to defend, with maybe not too many team mates in front of him who would help him out in that respect - although those world class attackers are a major help on offense of course. His duels and containing jobs of Cristiano Ronaldo are a stuff of legend. Very often Dani Alves succeeded against him, on his area of the field. He also had a direct hand in the last meaningful trophy Brazil won (with a team in transition); goal and assist in the final against Argentina, 3-0 win. It's also my impression he was quite consistently productive, irrespective of whether Pedro or Messi was playing further up on the field.
That's a great point. And thinking about it, its something I have tended to overlook before when rating any players like this. But yes, that does work against Ramos IMO and other players who are more red card prone as that makes them less consistent players. Krol and Vogts? Not sure they are *clearly* above him (especially if you are weighing team trophies heavily) but they are definitely in the debate.
This is a bit harsh on Low. Low played Lahm in CDM because thats where Guardiola was playing Lahm for much of the year. So its not like it was a completely random idea like your post makes it sound. He also adjusted after he saw Lahm playing in midfield wasn't working. He might not be a revolutionary genius but he is not really inept. That's right. Every name I thought of was a left back. Vogts though I'd still rate higher. Also with a claim would be Zanetti and Thuram, though it really depends on how much you weigh team trophies for individual claims. But if I look at it from I have to pick a side in their club prime in a match my life depends on, I am picking Vogts, Zanetti, Thuram before Alves. Probably Lahm before him as well tbh.
If you're as team are on the backfoot then I prefer Vogts and Thuram too. Not sure about Zanetti (who excelled as left back) and Lahm really. As an overall player the problem with Zanetti is that he was hiding in the shadows for some time, maybe unfairly, but Alves was already a very prominent right-back at Sevilla. He has 100 league assists (a very high amount), with more than 35 as a Sevilla player.
Krol was a sweeper for more than half of his career. Maybe/arguably he reached his zenith as a sweeper. When he was a left back Ajax won an European Cup (incl. a 3-0 demolishing in the semi final) and reached another final without him (where Ajax struggled to field a fit team really). He was good of course, worthy of an all star selection, or thereabouts, in the 1974 and 1976 tournaments. But two of the four finals were reached without him and that's perhaps indicative. As a sweeper he captained a weakened Holland side to a World Cup final (nursing an injury); he captained an official FIFA World XI team and was the joint best rated player of the match; achieved his very best Ballon d'Or finishes; captained and was the star player when Ajax reached the EC semi final in 1980 (on a different day they might have won the tie, maybe); became a star at Napoli (with better press grades all around that either Scirea or a 'youngish' Baresi). As an individual he reached arguably his apex as a sweeper. You might even say that this was his most natural position, given how he played the left back spot. Long story short: he was a left back for five/six seasons, and sweeper for eight seasons in his prime.
Sorry, I had missed this post. At euro 1976 Adrie van Kraaij (from PSV) was the sweeper. Ruud Krol was still the left back (nominally at least). http://www.voetbalstats.nl/spelernedxi.php?persid=273 Van Kraaij was also the libero against Poland and against Belgium at euro 1976. In the 3-0 win against Poland at home he formed the central defense with his PSV team mate Krijgh (in the 1-4 away loss earlier he was paired with Twente stopper Overweg, which he didn't like). For the 1978WC qualifiers Krol became the sweeper. He was schooled as a central defender (source: M. de Vos - De Ajacieden [1971]). For the U-23 teams he played as sweeper already. At senior level the switch was first talked about in September 1975. The national team coach had a conversation with Krol and captain Cruijff about the idea (and all three were in favor of the idea, especially the captain). For Ajax this was at the end of October 1975. So the switch happened during the 1975-76 season.
After the Champions League Ro16 games this week, I have to agree with @benficafan3 that Thiago Silva has no business being in this team. The guy goes missing time and time again in big games. He's not a leader like Ramos and Pique are.
Of Sergio Ramos's 21 goals in the Champions League (as if that isn't impressive enough for a defender), 18 came when Real Madrid were either tied or losing the game. That isn't by chance. He is a winner, Thiago Silva is not, as has been evidenced time and time again.
Back to the original post (apologies). If you're going to include the likes of Falcao, Nedved, Matthaus, Redondo, Nesta, Xavi, Pirlo, Schweinsteiger, Henry, Busquets (!), then it is difficult to imagine how you can ignore Rummenigge, Stoichkov, Gullit, Scholes, Riquelme, Rivaldo, to name a few off the top of my empty head. Still, no real duffers in your teams (thank goodness you didn't put Roberto Carlos in!)
To be fair, Real Madrid's tactics are a lot more suicidal than Atletico Madrid's much more defensive tactics. Goals Allowed are, in that sense, a misleading statistic, since it gives close to no insight (in and of itself) into how potentially suicidal or adventurous the tactics were. Basically, if Godin played at Real Madrid, Godin would almost certainly have more header goals (since Real Madrid creates more corner kicks and overall more scoring opportunities), and Godin's GA statistic would be significantly higher than it is at Atletico Madrid. As for Sergio Ramos' national team career: he was very good at the 2012 Euro as a center back, but then was abysmal in the 2014 World Cup, and again failed to make a good impression at Euro 2016 -- definitely a mixed bag at NT level since he was converted to a CB. Many defenders have been more consistent than him, at NT level, at the CB position. Ramos' 2014 World Cup was one of the worst defensive performances I've ever seen, though to be fair to Ramos, Pique was almost just as bad (though not quite as bad in my book) and Spain overall was a huge disappointment. At club level, on the other hand, I struggle to think of another CB who has been more directly influential to a trophy (I'm speaking of Ramos here, of course).
I don't really care much for Silva, but to be fair to him: 1. Neymar's FK goal was perfect, and there's nothing Silva can do about that. 2. Penalty Kick for Messi's only goal: Silva had absolutely nothing to do with said PK, and also cannot be blamed for it - it was a stupid PK that resulted out of a stupid mistake by a defender not named Silva. 3. Penalty Kick for Neymar's second goal: again, I find it difficult to blame Silva for what was, yet again, another stupid PK that Silva shouldn't be blamed for. 4. The 2-0 goal was an own-goal: there's close to nothing Silva can do about his own teammates scoring own goals. 5. The referee denied PSG an absolutely obvious PK: Mascherano clipped Di Maria, clearly, and the referee turned a blind eye. Overall: 4 out of 6 goals were demonstrably not Silva's fault. The referee denied PSG a clear penalty kick. What exactly is the actual basis for Silva having "gone missing yet again" when so many things cannot be blamed on Silva? Perhaps I'm missing something, but so far my impression is that Silva has been used as the scapegoat for mistakes that, really, should not be blamed on him.
I would prefer Mascherano to Busquets were it my team. Scholes' absence from any of your sides is the most glaring omission in my view.