The Top 5 players in the world in every 5-year period

Here's a list of some great players based on the player's age when they were around 24 to 29 years old which is usually their physical prime ordered by birthday:

(1915-1920)

Arthur Friedenreich
Imre Schlosser
Patsy Gallacher
Alan Morton
Charlie Buchan
José Piendibene

(1920-1925)

Hector Scarone
Ricardo Zamora
Josep Samitier
Julio Libonatti
Paulino Alcántara

(1925-1930)

Gyorgy Orth
Jose Leandro Andrade
Alex James
Manuel Ferreira
José Nasazzi
Luis Monti
Matthias Sindelar
Raimundo Orsi
Pedro Petrone

(1930-1935)

Dixie Dean
Giuseppe Meazza
Giovanni Ferrari
Leônidas
Bernabé Ferreyra

(1935-1940)

Gyorgy Sarosi
Domingos da Guia
Silvio Piola
Josef Bican
Isidro Lángara

(1940-1945)

Stanley Matthews
Arsenio Erico
José Manuel Moreno
Obdulio Varela
Adolfo Pedernera
Ángel Labruna
Heleno de Freitas

(1945-1950)

Valentino Mazzola
Zizinho
Gunnar Nordahl
Tom Finney
Nils Liedholm
Ademir de Menezes
Stan Mortensen

(1950-1955)

Nilton Santos
Juan Alberto Schiaffino
József Bozsik
Alfredo Di Stéfano
Ferenc Puskás
László Kubala
Didi

(1955-1960)

John Charles
Djalma Santos
Sándor Kocsis
Garrincha
Raymond Kopa
Lev Yashin
Just Fontaine
Josef Masopust

(1960-1965)

Omar Sívori
Uwe Seeler
Luis Suárez
Bobby Charlton
Gordon Banks
José Altafini

(1965-1970)

Pelé
Denis Law
Jimmy Greaves
Eusébio
Giacinto Facchetti
Bobby Moore
Gianni Rivera

(1970-1975)

George Best
Gerd Müller
Franz Beckenbauer
Rivelino
Johan Cruyff
Jairzinho

 

Best players by lustrum:

1900-04 Walker
1905-09 Meredith
1910-14 McMenemy
1915-19 Friedenreich
1920-24 Orth
1925-29 Scarone
1930-34 James
1935-39 Sárosi
1940-44 Moreno
1945-49 Ademir
1950-54 Puskás
1955-59 Di Stéfano
1960-64 Pelé
1965-69 Pelé
1970-74 Cruyff
1975-79 Zico
1980-84 Platini
1985-89 Maradona
1990-94 Baggio
1995-99 Ronaldo
2000-04 Zidane
2005-09 Cristiano
2010-14 Messi
2015-19 Messi
2020-24 Messi
2025-29 ?

 

Zico hands down in 80/84. You can then put Cruijff again or Rivelino in 75/79 if you consider putting Zico as best in the world for an entire decade as excessive.

 

Ronaldo should be the one in 2015-2019 not Messi. He achieved the legendary threepeat in Champions League, won the Euro and two ballon d'or (arguably should be three).

 

Zico was 22 in 1975; it is highly likely that he was faster and a better dribbler during those years. A friend who supports Flamengo told me that Zico was a better dribbler in the 70s—that detail is significant to me. Proof of this is that, during the 1978 World Cup, he averaged five dribbles per 90 minutes. As for Platini, he deserves to be included for the 1980–1984 period; he deservedly won two Ballons d'Or and had a "GOAT-level" campaign at the Euro.

 

Ademir performed better during those years. Zizinho had better years in the 50s, according to Carioca ratings.

 

Partly true, as it is indeed normal, even Maradona lost high speed dribbling prowess after coming to Italy. But only partly: as Falcao revealed in his book about the the Sarria tragedy, Telé banned dribbling at midfield at WC 82. In any case Zico matured during late seventies to reach his peak in the early eighties as a complete, nearly flawless attacking midfielder. The most complete ever in my opinion (maybe bar Messi): Ronaldinho, Baggio, Zidane, even Platini and Maradona could never claim elite level of mastery in all technical features relevant to an AM to the extent Zico showed (Platini the one that came the closest).

 

It seems incredible, but Zizinho was the best player in the Paulista championship in 1957. He also had good years in Carioca football prior to that. Ultimately, I feel Ademir was slightly better and more pivotal to the titles won with Vasco and Fluminense. Although, perhaps the best choice is Stanley Matthews.

 

I agree that Zizinho was a better footballer than Ademir. However, I’m not sure if he performed better during that 1945–1949 period. But we can certainly agree that Ademir was influential in the titles won. Here are the ratings from the Carioca championship.

Nota média do melhor jogador ofensivo de cada edição do Campeonato Carioca de 1947 a 1958 segundo o Jornal dos Sports:

1947: Ademir (7.79)
1948: Zizinho (8.41)
1949: Ademir (8.25)
1950: Zizinho (8.29)
1951: Zizinho (8.60)
1952: Zizinho (8.47-8.52*)

(1/2)

— LV (@kjdakda) February 26, 2023

 

It's a very idealized view of things.

 

It is a bit tranchant of course, as any synthetic judgement can't avoid being, but it is quite straightforward for a football "scholar" to convince himself that Zico had it all -dribble, first touch, ball handling, ball carrying, through pass, chip pass, crossing, shooting (both from dead ball and open play), even header and acrobatics- to the highest level of mastery. None of other #10 could claim the same (maybe bar Messi). This does not mean he was the greatest, Maradona for instance was more effective in creating big chances from dribbling and ball carrying, and many thinks that all in all h3 was a superior player. But not even Maradona was all-round as good as Zico (he was behind in shooting and very act of goal scoring in general).

 

Well, I think you already know my take on Zico: I recognize he was a hugely talented player, but ultimately, as a neutral spectator, I feel a certain frustration—a sense of something left unfinished.

 

A player's greatness is not merely the sum of his parts.

Furthermore, among your four claims, the last two warrant discussion:

1) "the top-scoring midfielder in the history of the sport": Zico was an advanced midfielder so that some label him a forward. Whatever. Let's not focus on words. What is certain is that he played in a more advanced position than 100% midfielders like Zidane and Platini. The comparison is therefore tenuous. And how often did he score against top-tier opposition? In high-stakes matches?

2) "one of the 3 greatest free-kick takers of all time": I suppose so, if you look at the raw numbers. But I come back to the two previous questions: how often did he score against top-tier opposition? In high-stakes matches?

 

The intercontinental cup is litterally his only notable achievement at the international level. Which is the level that matters the most ultimately.

His carreer with the Brazil NT is a complete failure, despite the occasional flashes of brilliance.

 

A Ballon d'Or for Jair in 1951 could be reconsidered.

 

To be eligible for the intercontinental, Flamengo had to win Libertadores first. Two achievement that put Zico on the same level as Platini and above Maradona in the international club trophies category. As Mr Foootball correctly pointed out, at Intercontinental 81 Zico and Flamengo schooled the Liverpool side that was dictating law in Europe back then.
Considering his affair with the NT, Zico played 71 games with the selecao and lost only 3. His chances to win major tournaments have been compromised by exogenous factors (mostly injuries). At WC 78 he was not 100% fit and Brasil got robbed by Argentina. At CA 79 he could play only 3 games (unfairly red carded, being goaded by the usual argentinian lowlife, and then injuried). To be noted that those 3 were the only CA matches he could play in his entire career. In 82 he was badly hit by the usual argentinan misfits in the match Brasil won 3-1 and as a consequences he could not avoid disappearing from the main action in the second half of the decisive match against Italy, hampered by pain. At WC86 he was still convalescent, and Brasil lost only at the penalty shootout. All in all, in the three WCs Zico "failed at" his "failures" were cumulatively down to 1 goal (that even came from a corner that was mistakenly granted to Italy, the ball had actually been saved).