Sweden has reached the quarter finals of wc 2018 without Zlatan. Despite his longevity was largerly irrelevant in ucl and international competitions and zlatan has never averaged impressive numbers other than that one season with PSG. For example, the season in which he scored 28 serie a goals in 32 games for milan, he scored 10 penalties. So 18 non penalty goals in 32 games. The second most prolific season in italy, 2009 with inter, he scored 23 non penalty goals in 35 games. For vast majority of his career, he hadnt come close to the 1 non penalty goal per game. He is not an elite goalscorer. But that is okay, his other areas of game are impressive and he is definitely an unique character and a player and arguably was misused for a lot of his career. Zlatan has one of the best self PR in history of football. Ultimately, a great player of his generation, but falls short to the top tier. If we broaden the definition of a striker to include the likes of Henry in there, 23rd best striker of all time is very generous out of me. Really, his whole argument depends on how good he is at playmaking compared to other strikers. Only that way i could see him crawl into top 30 convo.
Crawl into top 30 all time striker convo or overall player? No ‘consensus’ top 30 all timer failed to win a World Cup/CL Except Roberto Baggio but even then I don’t think he is a undisputed inclusion anymore(at least amongst new generation fans) He was though Top 50 is very possible though for Zlatan A top 10 CF of all time is more than likely also a top 50 player of all time These lists are skewed towards attacking and creative players(rightly IMO as they do the hardest job on the pitch) A top 50 list shouldn’t have more than 2 goalkeepers and 5-10 defensive players I know you probably don’t value this argument but I think being a consistent scorer of spectacular goals gives you an advantage over a player who is marginally more prolific but doesn’t score nowhere near as many spectacular goals. It doesn’t however give you an advantage over a player who is vastly more prolific(Gerd muller springs to mind here) I’m not passing this advantage off as fact but it is a preference(and most fans of the beautiful game would concur) And of course as you already allude to zlatan was much more than just a scorer of great goals(he was a superb all rounder for significant periods of his career)
Obviously top 30 striker of all time. I think you just have an arbitrary sense of what it means to be top 5, top 10 or top 30 rather than actually thinking about it. Put all of great strikers from the past on one sheet of paper and you will see how many they are. Top 30 is not meant as a criticism from me it just that all time is a long period of time. Zlatan is not even comfortably clear of likes of Benzema and Aguero and Rooney of this era, let alone beginning the conversation about the likes of Greaves, Dean, Shearer that came up in media recently due to Haalands record, then Lineker, Bican, Hugo Sanchez, Romario, even Telmo Zarra, Fontaine, Dinamite (that you yourself praised recently). lol Eusebio!! I, with limited knoweldge of football history can see how competitive the list can become, i am sure I am oblivious to so many more.. You are just underestimating what it means to be top 30. I would even comfortably lean on Zlatan being out of top 30 ranking
It's the old debate about bigger and better, or talent and legacy. Ibra has fewer individual titles compared to other strikers, even from his era (bigger, legacy). But he has a unique playmaker style, unlike other strikers of any era (better, talent). 5 tournaments with +0.5 through balls is impressive Ibra can be placed in the category of Bergkamp, Laudrup, players with unique talents but didn't won as much individually (ballon d'or, golden boot, etc)
Lay out your top 30 strikers Doesn’t have to be in order of greatness Just reel of names of strikers you think would qualify for this debate No point going back and forth when I don’t even know who you consider to be in that top tier I love Rooney(since I was a kid lol) and I disliked what cristiano Ronaldo said about him in the press but he is absolutely not a better player as Zlatan There isn’t even a case to be argued here in his favour I can tell you about his best(and worst games) as much as I can tell you about cristiano Rooney was a borderline championship level player as early as 2015/16
I am the wrong person to ask that because i dont really engage in such nuanced and hypotethical lists nor do i have knowledge to evaluatw many of past players but here is one of the lists that is a bit outdated that answers that question: https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/1954831-ranking-the-top-60-strikers-of-all-time.amp.html They put Zlatan at 40th place although the list is very questionable because they include the likes of Pele, Di Stefano, Baggio, Meazza, etc as strikers.. However, interesting names pop out like Stoichkov, Shevchenko, Weah, Seeler, Peyroteo, Nordahl, Kocsis, Batistuta, Papin, Klinsmann, Del Piero etc that I have not mentioned so far.. Already, there are many names mentioned that would transform a conversation into an exhausting debate about how Zlatan compares to all of them. There are several things to say. In terms of peak, Zlatan cant be put in conversation with Ronaldo, Van Basten and few more who have been undisputed best strikers for a period of time. I am not sure Zlatan has a single season that would qualify him as the best striker in the world at that moment in his career. 2009 with inter and 2016 with psg come to mind, but that is arguable. Given football has been played for 100+ years, there are many, many strikers by definition that qualify as the best striker in that moment which, considering the all time great list, is very important. It is how great you are compared to your peers. One can argue there were eras with less quality strikers and being (possibly) the 3rd best behind Suarez and Lewa is better than being the best with no competition but again. Those are nuances that would take a lot of time to go through the clutter. Without doing that work, my educated guess is that he is not top 30 striker. Have in mind that i said 23rd best striker of all time as a joke.
Zlatan was good but not an all time great imo brilliant technique but never won a major tournament and was moved around a lot he was always on the best team when he won anything in terms of league titles, with generally the best squad. Maybe ac in 2012 is different but other than that he’s no where near a top striker of all time
He travelled the world and won league titles every time apart from with ManU ( understandably) .. as a side note on his first day at training he apparently took control of the dressing room !! Within 20 minutes he’d had enough of Paul Pogba and told him keep his mouth shut unless he had something constructive to say !! WOW !!
Zlatan ibrahimovic is a good player with 570 career goals which ranks him 14th on the all time list Great players with less goals than this good player are Roberto dinamite Hugo Sanchez Luis Suarez Sarosi Gunner Nordahl Alfredo Di Stéfano Jimmy greaves Zico Etc..................... Before anyone mentions GPG Goals per game is a trash statistic in truth The more games you play the lower your GPG rate goes The guy with longevity(the biggest test) and the highest absolute numbers gets the nod Nobody gives a shit about agueros goals per min rate The greatest skill in football is durability/availability and aguero never scored 20 non penalty goals In a single PL season meanwhile shearer did multiple times and consequently has the overall scoring record(the only record that counts) GPG or goals per 90 can only (or at least should only)be compared between 2 players who have played either exactly the same or at least roughly the same amount of minutes/games
A lot of (physically unfit?) guys on BS are typically undervaluing the significance of longevity Skimming over it and not even giving it a moments consideration as being something even remotely praiseworthy Thierry Henry Is longevity the toughest thing to achieve in football? Yes. But it’s also the ultimate accolade – especially when you’re a striker, with all the young guys coming through. It’s not just a question of staying power, it is also an obligation to perform. There is no more beautiful trophy than longevity. To stay at the same level, when people are expecting so much at each game … Ronaldo, Messi … Are people really aware of what they do, of their consistency of performance? Do they realise how tough it is to be always at the top? https://amp.theguardian.com/footbal...-henry-arsenal-arsene-wenger-barcelona-career No they don’t because they still talk shit on football forums for decades about how longevity is just a footnote to a players legacy
There is a difference between legacy and football abilities. You can rate zlatan highly based on longevity, but that doesnt make him the better player at his peak Longevity is associated with dedication and the work put in over the long period of time. It is admirable and has some value, but it is a consolation prize. Everyone wants to reach the highest peak possible in football. Longevity is what settle for when you fail at being the best. Also there is a another point about longevity which is ability to prove you can do something great over and over again, but after lets say 3 seasons at similar level, youve proven that you can do that and doing it 4th, 5th,.. time doesnt add on your peak, but it is a testimate to perserverence and effort.
Not only longevity, Ibra was a crazy passer and finisher He has more tournaments with +0.5 through balls than CR7, Suarez, Lewa, Benzema or any other striker except Messi Never won a major tournament and was moved around a lot, as thebigman said. but his technique was brilliant.
This doesn’t even make sense 1 is better then 2, 2 than 3,3 than 4,4 than 5 etc This is just basic The longer you maintain a level the harder it is and perseverance/mental fortitude is a prerequisite of being a great player It is not a plus(ad on,something nice,cool lol) It is a prerequisite A player who maintains a supreme level for just 3 seasons is more than likely not a mentally strong/motivated professional(ie not a great player)
3 ‘world beating’ seasons in a 15-20 season career is actually crap Especially if It means you were distinctly average for large swathes of your career Those mediocre/crap seasons weigh as much as those out ‘world class’ ones And if you have enough bad seasons they might start tarnishing the little good that you actually did A 1 goal in 5 game striker has never to my knowledge been considered a great striker so why is a player who averages one world class season per five seasons played in his career considered a great player?
He was never a Lacey player and as a striker, you can use that big physique to maintain a level for longer Look at giroud, he could probably play till 40 too
you are mixing apples and oranges.. longevity (or more accurately, consistency) in the sense of football abilities is needed to prove that great thing you did for one season is not a fluke but that you can SUSTAIN it, but after you repeat it like 3 times in a row, it possibly can NOT be a fluke so that is the level you can SUSTAIN. Repetition after that has no more bearing on proving that you can do it because obviously you can, but then it enters into a different kind of conversation... legacy conversation which is accumulation of achievements rather than talent and abilities at peak. Zlatan clearily lags behind many strikers in terms of abilities at his peak, but has a pretty solid legacy due to longevity. And quite frankly longevity is overrated. I understand that doing something for the love of it and because you are good at it, but i cant imagine how insecure and internally restless person has to be to keep wanting to prove themselfs at an elite level over and over and over and over and over again. To me, that is a sign of insanity rather than competitivness or something admirable, but that is a conversation for some other time.
I think it's way more than just a matter of legacy though. It's also about greatness because each additional world-class season get increasing more difficult. You are right in that if someone has 3 world-class seasons, we usually grant him that operating at a world-class level was not a fluke. However, the difference in greatness between someone with 1 world-class season and 3 world-class seasons and someone with 3 world-class seasons and 5 world-class seasons is not the same. The gap between 5 and 3 is much bigger than 3 and 1, imo. This is especially the case once you factor in age. It gets increasingly harder to get that additional one world-class season because people age and the war and tear adds up. That is a different flavor of talent that I think is under-appreciated. I actually tend to take the opposite position, but that's a different conversation. I'd just like to say I think at his peak, there are few in history as as talented, specifically in terms of abilities.
Those are synonyms. Legacy and greatness. There are different things to say here. In terms of age. If someone can remain effective at an older age, as his physical attributes decline, means that player has abilities to adapt his game to remain effective but it does not adds points to his abilities when he was at the peak of his powers. For example, if a player X has a peak of 9/10 for 3 seasons then afterwards holds the level of 8.5/10 for another 3 seasons then 8/10 for another 3 seasons.. he is slowly declining in his physical abilities and has put in the work to adapt to it and still holds high level (8.5 and 8) Visually that looks like 9/10 9/10 9/10 8.5/10 8.5/10 8.5/10 8/10 8/10 8/10 That is admirable and considered longevity, but at his peak he is a proven 9/10 player. Player Y has 9.5/10 for 3 seasons but then falls of to 8.5 for 2 seasons and then to 7.5 for another 2 seasons That looks like this: 9.5/10 9.5/10 9.5/10 8.5/10 8.5/10 7.5/10 7.5/10 Player Y at his peak is better than player X and in that sense is a more talented player, but didnt have the same longevity for whatever reason (demotivation, injuries,..) Then player Z has random seasons like this: 9.5/10 8.5/10 8/10 8.5/10 8.5/10 8/10 7.5/10 8.5/10 Player Z isnt a 9.5/10 player because he was never been able to replicate that kind of performance in any other season so his peak is not 9.5/10, but rather something as 8.5/10 which is something he was able to consistently produce. So in terms of peaks it is: player Y > player X > player Z.. In terms of legacy or greatness you would have to add up all of their seasons and see who has the highest number. So legacy is accumulated goods player produced while peak is performances player was able to put in reliable and consistently in a certain, long enough period of time. It is good and admirable to have longevity and it holds a value, but when comparing players in terms of talent and abilities, the more important is what they have been able to consistently put at their peak. Having a longer career doesnt prove that someones peak is higher or lower than what it was, but it is a demonstration of different attributes. You can personally value perserverence or dedication or longevity more so than peak abilities but i dont. And it is usually a consolation prize for those who were unable to reach the highest levels in their peak. More juicy conversation is, at their peak, who was able to be as impactful and as effective on the football pitch as possible.
In this case I differentiate legacy and greatness because while legacy is often tied with accolades and trophies, I don't think greatness does. I think doing extremely difficult things is great regardless of whether you are awarded with the accolades or not. Cesc's time at Arsenal barely added anything to his legacy, compared to what he did with Spain, for example, but I think it forms the core of what made him great. I understand your point completely. Obviously I'm not saying that what players do outside their peak years somehow add to their peak. That wouldn't even make sense. I only wanted to make the point that there is a world of difference between someone who can maintain their peak for 5 years and someone who can do it for 3 because it gets increasingly harder. If we want to do it mathematically as you did and we have: Player A: 1 year at 9.0/10 Player B: 3 years at 9.0/10 Player C: 5 years at 9.0/10 I'm saying that the gap between Player C and B is significantly bigger than B and A. Not just in terms of greatness but actual peak or at least world-class seasons. The ability to maintain a world-class level for long periods of time is severely under-appreciated IMO compared to reaching the highest peaks.
Cristiano Ronaldo 2013/14 champions league 17 goals 25 dribbles completed 21 key passes 5 assists 5 tackles made https://www.whoscored.com/Players/5583/History/Cristiano-Ronaldo Karim Benzema 2021/22 champions league 15 goals 12 dribbles completed 19 key passes 3 tackles made 2 assists https://www.whoscored.com/Players/14296/History/Karim-Benzema Erling Haaland 2022/23 champions league 12 goals 1 assist 12 dribbles completed 7 key passes 1 tackle made https://www.whoscored.com/Players/315227/Show/Erling-Haaland Overall Cristiano Scored two more goals(17)than benzema (15) and five more goals than haaland(12) Completed more dribbles(25)than haaland(12) and benzema(12) put together Tackled more players(5) then Haaland(1) and Benzema(3) put together Assisted more goals(5) than Benzema(2) and Haaland(1) put together Provided more key passes(21) than benzema(19) and Haaland(7) Ronaldo 2013/14 CL= Benzema CL 2021/22 CL + Erling Haaland 2022/23 CL ..................................................... Non factor cristiano Ronaldo in Euro 2016 3 non penalty goals+3 assists 625 minutes played 0.87 non penalty goals+assists per 90 https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/cristiano-ronaldo/nationalmannschaft/spieler/8198/verein_id/3300/plus/0?hauptwettbewerb=EM&wettbewerb_id=EM16&trainer_id=&start=Aug+20,+2003&ende=Jun+11,+2023&nurEinsatz=0 Karim Benzema (whole Euro career) 3 non penalty goals+2 assists 863 minutes played 0.52 non penalty goals+assists per 90 https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/karim-benzema/nationalmannschaft/spieler/18922 Erling Haaland (whole Euro career) N/A
Ronaldos Euro 2016 is greater than Haaland and benzemas Euro career put together And his 2013/14 CL is better than Haaland 22/23 and benzema 21/22 put together He was a more prolific scorer And was better than them combined in non goalscoring aspects So he is wrong here(mistaken no big deal) But you are always wrong(have never been correct about anything in your big soccer ‘career’)