How good do we think Puskas actually was?

As I have said on other occasions, in my opinion, among the best players in history Puskas is the most underrated of all (among the best players in history I am talking about Di Stéfano, Pele, Cruyff, Beckenbauer, Maradona, Cristiano Ronaldo, Messi and of course Puskas). And I say that he is undervalued because almost no one puts him in a top-3 or top-5 in history when he has plenty of arguments for it (the other 7 players probably also have them but I am surprised that few people opt for the Hungarian in the highest positions in the ranking). And I include myself among the people who sometimes “undervalue” Hungarian.

Puskas has it all, great longevity, magnificent technique, an excellent scoring record and also assists from the looks of it, a great record with Honved, which at the time was one of the best teams in Europe (perhaps the best in the period 1950-55), he was a very important player in Di Stéfano's Real Madrid where he made history in the Glasgow final and also in the 1962 final despite the defeat against Benfica and he was the leader of what for me is the best National team in history, Hungary from 1950-56, a team with incredible records that only missed being world champion but with which it managed to win the 1952 Olympic Games and the Central European International Cup of National Teams (1948 -53).

And we cannot forget that Puskas was suspended for about 18 months between his departure from Hungary and his arrival in Madrid, which would undoubtedly have increased his records. I have always thought that without that sanction Puskas could have been the top scorer at the time history of football above Bican (today he would surely have been surpassed by Messi and CR7, but the Hungarian would clearly have a better scoring average than the Argentine and the Portuguese).

I don't know right now, but surely Puskas' combined statistic in “goals + assists” per game may be the highest in history, surpassing other greats like Messi or Pelé.

For me Puskas should never be in a ranking below eighth position, then from 1 to 8 everyone places it as they consider.

 

I guess it'd difficult firstly in a way to define what is meant by "how good was he?", and then obviously there is the issue about not really being able to say whether performances like vs England in 1953 or in the 1960 European Cup Final were typical/standard/very good/a little away from the best he could produce even (before starting any kind of estimation about how such form would transfer to playing in the modern era, or the 90s, or the 80s, or for Botafogo when Pele was at Santos or whatever....).

I guess BOAT and GOAT are different things too (the first standing for best of all-time and more about peak level, as well as how reliably a player could produce that level and in what circumstances etc).

I tend to think (if taking each player as they were at their best, or maybe taking that version of them and putting it in a modern scenario at least, eliminating any disadvantages re: not receiving the latest traning/diet or whatever) the shortlist for BOAT possibly wouldn't include him. I think Pele would be on it, probably/arguably Cruyff and/or Maradona, and Di Stefano and Messi will have realistic claims too. Maybe that's it (not that everyone has to agree of course); someone like Platini might in my estimation not be definitely behind Di Stefano and/or Messi, all in all at his best, but it's easier to say he's behind Maradona (at his top level of play at least), Cruyff (ditto) for example (and it just seems to me he's behind prime Pele very probably of course too; I understand many will say exactly the same about prime Messi btw so I'm not wanting to start an argument about that or go off topic away from Puskas) and so not really in the debate. I think all of those (not talking about Platini, for clarification) were more capable as expansive soloists than Puskas (there might be an argument about whether Di Stefano was a better dribbler or not, but it seems fair to say he could run the game more, carry the ball with more pace, dictate the game from deep in midfield to attack etc...based on what can be read and seen about him - this is a point about being a more expansive soloist, not about it being set in stone that Di Stefano was better than Puskas as I know there are those that said/say otherwise....but it's like I said re: Platini, Puskas would have to be realistically better than all of the candidates not just have an argument or uncertainty compared to one or two of them....).

I guess the names won't be much different for GOAT, but I can see how when really concentrating on the full career, and the impact/level of the player through it (and how good they were when young, how good when past normal peak or even retirement age etc), it might be more feasible to bring Puskas into the conversation anyway. Perhaps the same could/couldn't be said about someone like Giussepe Meazza too for example (but then it's even harder to really get a proper idea about just how good he was at his best for a start) - I would doubt it but I suppose it's hard to say definitely not (Meazza didn't have the late career that Puskas did though).

I think it is clear Puskas did have a really good long pass on him (with his left anyway), and could also play clever and accurate mid range and short range passes. We surely don't have enough footage overall to be certain, but maybe it seems a stretch to say he was among the best ever passers though.

Likewise (even moreso) for dribbling it's hard to really be certain, but I suppose that data was collected from a limited sample of games, and I suppose within the definition of dribbling will be things like little twists, turns, dummies, feints, touches etc to move the ball away from a single player (which both Puskas and Hidegkuti seem evidently really good at, as well as going past a single player before getting a shot away for example, such as Hidegkuti vs England or Puskas in the 1953 game vs Italy with a goal shown in the intro part of the video I'm posting below...also Puskas vs England with the drag-back goal of course can be relevant for skills used to evade a defender that might count as a 'dribble' even). Maybe it's lack of footage to some extent, but I've not tended to think of Puskas as someone who would go on a long gliding/mazy dribble past several players, or even twist/turn his way past multiple opponents (the sorts of things Messi, Maradona, Cruyff, Pele would each do in their own ways - Pele scored quite a lot of 'dribble goals' in one way or another of course). Like I say it depends on the definition of dribbling, but I guess for 'pure dribbling' as it were (as opposed to using tricks and skills) the wingers Czibor and Toth (number 11 and 7 respectively), playing for Hungary vs Italy here, could well have been superior to Puskas, within that Hungarian generation (I can't remember if this game would have been used in that analysis though I think it wasn't from memory without double-checking):

Later Hungarians Florian Albert and Ferenc Bene would probably have been better pure dribblers than Puskas anyway it seems to me for example (but yes that doesn't exclude him from some kind of good dribbler/trickster bonus at least when comparing to other prolific scorers in general).

As much as it might not seem it at times, I suppose I think that when thinking about the 'BOAT' then it should at least be factored in that relatively earlier times were more basic (and Puskas himself mostly played in quite an open era - nevertheless the goal contribution % method does at least account for that as far as goal contributions go...not forgetting that at Real Madrid Di Stefano was indeed much more of an omnipresent player and Puskas acted as closer to a pure striker albeit not exactly a static centre forward, and still nominally an inside left even rather than the designated CF). But yeah, especially when thinking about how they did in their own times, the GOAT debate might be a more realistic place for him to be included at least as someone to discuss, I guess. What can't be known is whether he was so good that if he was currently playing for Arsenal/Hungary say they'd both become prime contenders to win the CL and next WC respectively say (I mean if they would he'd be automatically a prime contender for best 21st century player at least already I suppose!).

I don't want to downplay him on dribbling too much btw (I do think that along with Hidegkuti, also Bozsik, he was one of those Magic Magyars who could and did manage to move past one or two opponents smoothly at times, as even the minimal footage can show), but yeah I think that aspect, plus general athleticism and solo prowess (from deep on the pitch potentially) is maybe what makes it hard to say he was every bit 'as good' as a Pele, Cruyff, Maradona, Messi....(not that it's impossible to make up the deficit in other areas, but taking Pele for example do we really feel he'd have been doing that in other particular facets of the game, or in general effectiveness/regularity?).

Potentially seems like a top 20, arguably top 10 BOAT candidate still I guess (but it's difficult to say, and one school of thought...and it's true I don't necessarily go this far myself...is that most of those 50s stars wouldn't rank so high literally in the context of playing in a more modern environment). For GOAT he can reasonably be higher and even talked of as a contender though probably yeah (depending on exactly what is being looked at, how things are weighed up etc).

 

Nice post mate, and well worth a rep I thought!

I was making my post at the same time, but I'll clarify on the above point, that yes as far as for GOAT goes, I probably tend to agree (like I hinted at), especially when really emphasising the worth of the full career and also evaluating all players primarily within their own times. For BOAT (best of all-time, merging all players from all eras as if they played at the same time) I have some more doubts (or might tend to increase the number from 8 at least), but firstly it's naturally to be more doubtful about that, and secondly like I say I think he has some disadvantages in athleticism/solo play and suchlike, so for example is it really possible to say his peak level was better than that of Van Basten or Ronaldo Nazario? It's difficult to say it definitely was or definitely wasn't maybe in the end. But it's easy to say he had a better career (albeit they had bad luck with injuries).

 

1:31 for that goal vs Italy he scored (he does get one in the game of 1955 that is the main focus of the video/title too, from Toth's cross, with a header, but it's that one in 1953 where he used a good touch to get the ball past an Italian and into his stride, before he scores into the top corner, with a typical Puskas shot I suppose).

EDIT: 2:25 has a good diagram of the Hungarian system/formation too (off topic but worth pointing out maybe - it's not the line-up vs Italy in 1955 though, when Tichy is number 9, not Hidegkuti, and he plays possibly more like a pure striker unless he was tasked with playing as the deep-lying centre-forward in essence still in that game which is maybe not really clear from the highlights).

 

Puskas is very underrated for unknown reasons compared to similar goal scorers like Cristiano Ronaldo. He has a better assist record too. It seems Puskas also has better general play as well IMO. Dribble wise not sure if he was better than Cristiano Ronaldo.

 

I think Puskas was the best player in the world for a brief period between 52-56, it's difficult to specify the dates, because the world of football wasn't so globalized, there wasn't so much confrontation between different countries and continents.

Puskas definitely appeared to the world of football at the Helsinki Olympic Games in 1952 and was perhaps the biggest global star until his legal problems at Honved in 1956 and the emergence of Di Stefano at Real Madrid in that year - who was hidden in Colombia. At Real Madrid, Puskas confirmed his legendary status, but shared the spotlight with Di Stefano (something that did not happen with other GOAT candidates such as Pelé, Messi, Maradona, etc.).

I saw some Puskas games available on Footballia. He was a great finisher and playmaker, but what caught my attention the most at the time was his movement, where he was all over the attack (left, right, inside). Brazilian Tostão in the 70 World Cup reminded me of Puskas' style of play, with less physical strength. Perhaps a comparison, a little further away, is with Benzema, the way he left the area, play a one-two, helped the ball circulate, the high IQ, (there is a big difference between Benzema and Lewa, for example, in terms of style and movement) but with more of an eye for goal.

I think that in these GOAT debates he is harmed by the period in which he played, in less globalized football. His goals and assists statistics and longevity are impressive. He has a case for top 10 all time.

 

Very Well said

 

I have him high on my all time list. He is on par with Cruijff, DiStefano, Maradona and Beckenbauer imo

 

1701597211740803402 is not a valid tweet id

 

7-9 range imo(7th most likely), same level with Platini and Beckenbauer.

 

Yeah, I suppose that it's hard to know (more than with goals) whether all the 'top assister' candidates have been studied for assist numbers (and in some cases it might be impossible), but for sure he seems to have a lot of them (albeit it's also hard to know exactly which ones might qualify as OPTA assists when using newspaper reports I guess).

It is true that he played in a high scoring era (which affects literal assist totals just like goal totals of course), and in 'dominant'/prolific teams (though they each benefitted from him being in them of course - it's hard to say to exactly what extent I suppose, though obviously in the Real Madrid case they had already been at the top before he joined them). He also played in the attacking area of the team generally speaking.

His assist contribution %s do seem very good too though don't they, so clearly he was providing the final pass quite a lot (considering that he was also scoring a lot of the goals himself). That's true of Pele too for example isn't it though? And certainly Cruyff. Maybe I would go as far as putting Cruyff among the best ever passes, and it's for sure a hard category to judge I think (a lot of players probably in truth not being far apart from each other in passing prowess and quality). So I don't say it's invalid or definitively wrong to suggest it about Puskas I suppose, but maybe it's just my feeling/impression it could be going a bit far (moreso perhaps if moving away from 'best assisters' to a general 'best passers' label)....even though of course there will be a big percentage of his assists we can't see, and there will be many games in which he could have been passing very well in general that we can't see either.

I guess if I think of a player from that time who I think probably does fit among the best ever passers it might be Didi of Brazil. This video does give some impression about it, especially the section around a third of the way in (he can also be watched in full vs France and Sweden in World Cup 1958 of course):

I don't think Trachta has tried to tally his assists has he? But anyway, clearly he was playing deeper than Puskas, so wouldn't be expected to have the final assist quite so often probably (conversely maybe he had more opportunities to play balls forward from the midfield I suppose though). Whether at some point in Didi's career he did play an equivalent 'inside forward' role to what Puskas played at some point in his own career is hard to know (or at least I don't feel I know the answer to it for definite as yet) though I suppose...although I kind of doubt he did in terms of the actual role/average field position, as I guess Didi would have been a kind of playmaking withdrawn forward to some extent anyway (in the Alex James at Arsenal kind of mould possibly), before he started playing in midfield in a 4-2-4.

I think it could be suggested Cruyff was actually at his best ever in terms of passing in the 80s (playing more as true midfielder himself), but it wasn't when he had his highest assist tallies/contribution rates.

I suppose this Platini video gives some kind of idea about the standard for being among the best ever passers (although it'd be fair to point out not all his long passes always reached their target or went where they were aimed; on the other hand it's also fair to point out it's only a relatively small selection of his passes/assists - two more I could mention for example off the top of my head, that theoretically could have been included, would be an angled key pass vs Ireland in 1980 and an assist to Laudrup vs Torino in 1985/86 played with the outside of the boot over defenders while facing his own goal):


Maybe these are a couple of good videos to give an idea about Glenn Hoddle's passing for example too:


This is another one, where some use of the weaker leg (not such a forte for Puskas) as well as the outside of the boot (that one was a capability of Puskas too to be fair on the other hand...or other leg might be a better way to say it!)
30/04/1983 Tottenham Hotspur v Liverpool - YouTube
This one has a great pass at 3:41 for example too
02/03/1985 Tottenham H v Real Madrid - YouTube
Hoddle is number 10 in all those clips, and is of course also playing as midfielder not forward (though I don't think we have his assist tallies to compare anyway)

I guess 'best passers' ever can be taken a bit wider than just a very few select players though (but then maybe it becomes difficult to stop adding candidates?). I'm not sure whether one of Puskas's team-mates, Bozsik (a deep-lying midfielder), might be regarded as the best passer of those Hungary/Kispest(Honved) teams they both played in though (it seems sure he didn't get close to as many actual assists as Puskas though). For sure anyway Puskas can be thought of as an excellent passer of the ball and very frequent assister of goals.

 

I suppose one way of looking at the question of how Puskas might have done in relatively recent times is to suggest that, with a vaguely similar style and set of qualities, he'd likely do at least as well as Raul did (I do think Puskas was probably better outright I should add though; and for sure he's a 'greater' player in the context of football history).

I do think Raul was possibly about as good a dribbler (and he wasn't seen as among the best dribblers of his time in general of course; for clarification in case any of my previous posts were confusing though, I do see Puskas as closer to being among the best passers rather than best dribblers)




I guess the goal at 1:01 on here is a bit Puskas-esque and a good example of Raul scoring that type of quality left-footed goal from reasonably far out anyway (vs Slovenia in Euro 2000)


EDIT - I'm not sure that Raul Real Madrid goals video is the best choice (or really his best ever as the title said) - I was short on time I wanted to spend on the post and picked one I'd not previously watched though! Anyway others are available (and ones with all his Real Madrid goals even of course).

 

I share a writing by Di Stéfano about Puskás

Sorry if the translation is bad, it was made with Google Translator

It is not easy for me to write an introduction to the book about Ferenc Puskás.
Of course, if time suddenly disappeared, and we could run out onto the playing field thanks to this, like when we were young, when we found joy in being famous players - without false modesty, because that doesn't fit here - and we had the Real Madrid jersey... everything would come alive again! But, unfortunately, not everything is the same anymore.
Remembering is not the same moment that we experienced, even if we go deep into the chasm of memory. We can revive many things, but it is no longer possible to experience everything as it was. Because then there was no desire, but now there is. The difference in time is so faint when we left our youth behind, and yet we don't know when it happened.

But the fact that I have to write a few-word prologue to this book obliges me to recall many things in my memory. The spirit of Puskás, as he was, the Puskás who is still in my mind and the Puskás who we somehow idealized, not only for his enormous talent as a player, but also as a hallmark of our friendship that has solidified over the years. He appears to the general public like a ray of light, or rather like an eternal candlestick. But I also have that Puskás in me, who trusts me, and in whom I trust, who has reached the same heights as a person as a player!

Pancho, as we christened him in Spanish, was and remains a great individual. The whole man is full of nobility. He was not influenced by his surroundings, he was always generous to those who asked him for something. And above all, a good comrade. And only after that came the football festival, when the public enjoyed his spirit and magnificent game from the stands, separately and next to me, whenever he came close to the ball.

Pancho was a super talent, although his physique did not impress such an impression. He was a footballer who was born to be a player who was only helped by time to make use of his talent. It was fast, especially in the short term. And he preceded the action in his mind, he already knew everything before the situation arose. I think I guess the truth: Puskás was a player of all time. Because there are people who are born with his talent and ball handling, and who use all of this consciously, not only for the sake of their own brilliance, there are no such people in every era.
Every era belongs to Puskás!
By the way, he was "suta", but devilishly suta. In a way that no one can do. He had some magic in his left leg to transmit the ball with binocular precision to forty meters, to stop it from running, to tame it. He always found the best position in the to shoot. Puskás began to amaze Europe in the 1950s, in the Hungarian national team that surprised the world with its efficiency and brilliance, that shook the English and Europe when they won with a flurry of goals at the terrifying Wembley. He was the star in the constellation, in which Hidegkúti, Kocsis, Bozsik stood out... He was the goal scorer in the Hungarian team that could not win the 1954 World Cup, but "spiced up" the old style of football with innovations. Actually, I really started to befriend him when he was over thirty years old, but Spain received his talent while it was still intact. Yes, Spain won an exceptional player and a great friend with him!
Ferenc Puskás' visit to his homeland was delayed for twenty-five years. But then he got a place in the old boys' team in his homeland. Puskás no longer feels mental pain, he has no nightmares. All of this is part of the short but inevitable biography.
What else can I say about Pancho in this introduction? I played with Puskás and I am his friend! The passion for football still holds us together! It keeps us together, like in the old days when we wore the same shirt!

 

Some Stats

Meters covered with possession of the ball


Accurate passes



Acc long passes (+20 meters)

1641889510052057091 is not a valid tweet id

1644430039960924160 is not a valid tweet id

 

Hidegkuti said this about Puskas of course:
"“Of all of us, he was the best. He had a seventh sense for soccer. If there were 1,000 solutions, he would pick the 1001st.” - Nandor Hidegkuti"

It's on this page with some other quotes about him:
The Galloping Major: Ferenc Puskas (thefootballhistoryboys.com)

And Hidegkuti even picked Puskas as number 1 all-time

Credit to @CristianoPuskas for finding that, and of course for that Puskas playmaking video....

Sebes the Hungarian manager also had Puskas above Pele (and everyone else), at least in 1962, apparently too
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/f...-players-g-o-a-t.2124069/page-3#post-41545761

Of course those are Hungarian views, and besides Kocsis thought the other way (and perhaps Puskas did himself with comments along the lines of Di Stefano being the best human/normal football player, because Pele was beyond that - he's also cited as saying Bozsik was the best he ever saw or knew but I'm not sure at what point he said that and it could be misleading to some extent, like Bobby Charlton's comments about Duncan Edwards can be...as evident once his quote on Di Stefano is seen and his France Football Players of the Century vote which didn't have Edwards in)
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/f...r-best-players-g-o-a-t.2124069/#post-41086592
Puskas did put all of Bozsik, Di Stefano and Pele in his own all-time XI
Guido on X: "@albertocosin Tenés la votación completa¿" / X (twitter.com)
(with Grosics, Victor Rodriguez Andrade, Santamaria, Beckenbauer, Nilton Santos, Bobby Charlton, Garrincha and Gento as can be seen on the 3rd page of that collection)

 

Yeah, those top stats are what is referred to in the OP I think aren't they. I guess, as informative as they are (and probably realistically indicative about Puskas playing accurate long passes for example) the sample size (and specific period taken from) limits the conclusions somewhat (as well as the general thing about interpreting stats), but interesting to see anyway.

I guess for example Hidegkuti, with his own stats vs England shown, could possibly have more satisfactorily combined a high number of passes with a high % success in one game (not that I've tried to check right now...and actually a few minutes of footage are missing anyway so maybe the total would be slightly estimated in any case). Maybe Bozsik's % would be lower on the other hand in that game (due to a few stray early ones) - Bozsik indicated as a top passer is realistic I'd think though I should say - there's a nice outside of the boot attempt from him in those Hungary vs Italy 1955 highlights I posted for what it's worth too actually. Interesting to see those stats for Puskas vs England (though already having seen the game of course) - actually with a lower pass completion % than in any of the 1955 games studied, so potentially indicative that he himself had a slightly higher than usual number of stray passes in the England game (potentially, like I say), despite obviously having plenty of key contributions in the game!

 

Some Brazilian players who consider Puskás one of best player they ever saw

Servílio (from São Paulo)
"I saw him play for the first time in Vienna, when Honved (from Hungary) played a match against Rapid. I belonged to Flamengo and we were touring Europe. I watched the game, from start to finish, and I confess that I was impressed by the precision of the passes and the ease of scoring goals that the current Real Madrid striker has. I've never seen anything like it! Dribbles perfectly and his shots have the right address"



Vavá (from Palmeiras)
"Name a player outside São Paulo"
"I'm going to mention a "cobrão" outside of Brazil: Puskas, from Real Madrid. One of the greatest players in the world"


Roberto (from São Paulo)
"Mentions Pelé, Didi and Puskás as the biggest "cracks" in the World"



Brazilian press comparing Pelé and Puskás

 

This was the actual more specific quote on Pele/Puskas, by Kocsis, that I should have posted a link to at first in the post above (2 posts above now....edit: 3 posts above now lol!) anyway really:
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/t...nds-of-the-sport.2026938/page-3#post-33723985
""after 15 years of football, the best player I have ever saw, he said, is the Brazilian Pelé. He is two times stronger than Puskas and yet the latter has always astonished me by the implausible number of things that he could do"."

 

I had intended to include this page too (though not specifically about Puskas) - a Football Manager Hungary 1953 tactics attempt, including an even more illustrative diagram re: line-ups roles (for me, although I see the reference to being a bit like 4-2-4 in a way, with Bozsik joining Hidegkuti at times, I'd probably see it more like 3-2-3-2 if anything, verging on 4-1-3-2 - Hidegkuti's own comments, as on that page, about Kocsis/Puskas and the wingers maybe backing up that idea too):
Gusztáv Sebes' Hungary 1953 Magical Magyars | Football Manager Tactics • Passion4FM
The back arrows on Puskas and Czibor (apparently drawn by Sebes, not only in the Football Manager tactic) indicating the involvements in terms of roaming around and dropping deeper....

 

Puskas didn't only have one assist vs England actually though (he had the one where he was on the ground and slid a pass to Hidegkuti, as well as the one where he played the lofted pass on the volley, also to Hidegkuti; he should probably have had a third to Hidegkuti as well that was disallowed for offside incorrectly it seems IIRC, bit obviously that isn't counted....).

Hopefully the other stats are still correct though, for that game and his 1962 EC Final performance....

 

a good debate can be held for Puskas vs Cruyff

however he was second to Orth in Hungary

 

Who was perceived better at the time, Di Stefano or Puskas?