His club carrer is a bit too much inconsistent, even in the NT. I don't think he sustained greatness as other comparable talents as Cruyff, Messi or Pelé who I all rate higher than him. But he was an maverick individual talent, no doubt about it, maybe a bit limited by his demons and physical problems.
What a stupid question. You expect to see idiocy on the internet. Was Maradona overrated ? He along with Messi are right there on the top step of the greatest to have ever played the game. Had it not been for injury, opponents thuggery, being led off the path by so called friends he would have had an even greater career. Ask his opponents and team mates what they think of him as opposed to some mealy mouthed journalists and internet pundits.
You can't have your cake and eat it too some key things to point out here: Tracta believes Michel platini is a top 15 all timer Tracta does not believe Daniel passarella was a top 30 all timer Nor does he believe cerezo or Dirceu were Gazzetta dello sport awards higher average ratings to Daniel passarella,Dirceu and cerezo over Michel platini for the entire duration of the Frenchman’s stay in Italy(1982-1987) Michel platini literally won all his ballon dors while playing in Italy 2 of his 3 league titles were also won there You have a firmly ingrained belief system(that Maradona was the best by default) And you will use any source to that end no matter who is sacrificed along the way you just ‘sacrificed’ Platini (his legacy) to put Maradona on top And you did that without probably even realising. This to me is completely hilarious
Tiddums. All his contemporaries inc. your Platini rated him as the best. I'll take their word over those sat behind a keyboard desperately trying to rewrite history to suit an agenda. Implying he was the best to many because of his charisma and behaviour. There are countless players with charisma and behaviour who become cult figures but not one has the level of ability of Maradona. It's the alliance of that ability with magnetism that makes Maradona truly stand out. He backed up the talk with the walk. His will and personality lifted all of his team mates. Have a word with them. Not a bad word to say about him. They all revered him. This has to be the dumbest thread on Bigsoccer and there are quite a few of those. Those arguing that he is over rated have an agenda of their own and have no idea about football at all. Usual suspects.
To be honest, Platini did say Maradona could do with an orange what Zidane could do with a ball (implying very high recognition of his skills indeed), but he actually rated Pele and Cruyff higher it seems (implying so on a few occasions but including in his vote for Player of the Century - I'm not sure why he only picked two players but of course it wouldn't be a surprise if he had named Maradona next if he had submitted the full five picks): https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/f...ho-voted-for-who.1597402/page-5#post-28873757
In fact, Platini has always declared that Pelè is the greatest of all time and Cruyff is the strongest player he has ever seen. This is interesting but do we have the chance to see Maradona's total average at the end of his experience in Italy? Here only Diego's first seasons are evaluated which are probably his best while for Platini (for example) the last season where he only played 12 games is even evaluated. If we analyze only Platini's first three seasons, he has an average of 6.62, he is 0.2 below Maradona but Platini appears to have the highest peak of all in the 1983/84 season with an average of 6.94
Well Maradona was not as complimentary to Platini esp. after he jumped into FIFA and showed his lovely corrupt nature. Probably explains it. Pele was surrounded by a glittering array of stars for all his time in the selecao some of whom have become overlooked as a result. Cruyff great player like van Haneghem but even he couldn't do what Maradona was capable of doing at times.
Platini did have Pele and Cruyff top 2 here too (the original attachment disappeared but this post has a summary of his choices that were in it, as of 1986 - but to be fair it's pretty clear I think that he was tending to omit current/modern players from consideration at that time): https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/f...list-august-1984.2038066/page-3#post-35032884
I don't think Cruyff wasn't capable of doing what Maradona did. The Dutchman left the best team in the world and entered a new league and a team that hadn't won La Liga for 14 years. He only made his debut at the end of October, Barcelona were second to last in the table and with him on the pitch they managed to win the scudetto (isn't that an extraordinary thing?), in the meantime Ajax who had dominated Europe with him in the team, was returned to win a championship just three years after his farewell (this should illustrate the impact Johan had on his teams).
Well, it is unfair to the others foreign players. Maradona arrived in 84/85 and that were his highest rated season. Then that list counts only until 87 and the other until 88. So basically, it counts only prime Maradona (before his decline start) therefore it harms the evaluation of other foreigners who have been there since 80. What's more, Why count only foreigners? If we include goalkeepers and defenders like Dino Zoff, Scirea and Franco Baresi, then can't Maradona be first? lol And please, count down to Maradona's last season at Napoli to be fair to the other players
That's even more impressive than Maradona's titles with Napoli since his UEFA Cup and his 86/87 scudetto he weren't even the highest rated player at his own team lol only in 89/90 he were the highest rated at Napoli
I argue that no rating (sofascore, gazzeta, etc.) should be taken literally. But they can be used as an extra piece of information to describe a player. I believe that these Gazzetta ratings don't mean that Platini played less than Junior, for example (not least because the difference is minimal, they were players in different positions, played in different teams, different systems, journalists can be wrong, we've seen in other threads how different newspapers rate players differently etc), but it does mean that everyone on the list had a high level of regularity Regarding Maradona, these high ratings blow apart the theory that Maradona was an irregular player. Since it's average, game by game.
They need to sell magazines. They need to connect to the public and who they are aiming at. They need to have advertisers as Coca Cola on board. Maradona and friends intimidated journalists and threatened them with a rifle. Some also don't want to see how old (and less marketable) Krol had the same or better ratings, who was also a captain and star foreigner for Napoli. Who didn't need to shoot journalists with a rifle or gun. Before this there have been other Italian Napoli players with outstanding ratings (on DBScalcio). The gullible ones just ignore all the obvious evidence. Maradona has one Uefa Cup win and otherwise a row of early exits. Some might call this irregular yes, when playing for the richest team (the richest until 1988 or 1989).
In other words, the ratings demonstrate and prove how Napoli stars in general received a high rating (the club with the highest attendances, big fanbase). Higher ratings than Maradona even. During and before his time. If you look closely, the ratings are actually not something working in his favor. Fairly or unfairly.
'before his decline starts' ..well i suppose he actually played pretty well in 88-89 and 89-90 seasons in serie a,,at least better than the 86-87 season.the last season was poor yes,not just for him but napoli too.all of us can check with utmost ease what napoli was doing before and after diego and realise if he had a significant influence there or not.i find silly comparing maradona with defenders,apples with oranges.the serie a was a defensive league dominated by class defenders and the ratings were a bit lenient towarda the italians,especially defenders and if i am not wrong almost every years 2-3 home defenders were leading the charts.
The top scorer charts tell a slightly different story Serie A 1985/86(joint 4th top scorer with a centre back) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985–86_Serie_A the season of the World Cup now it’s also been uncovered their average ratings in Serie A over several seasons were of the same level(6.64 vs 6.61) This is heading in a very awkward direction.
Also i don't understand the logic behind comparing DM10 with ruud krol,baresi and other quality defenders.cannot compare them with advance stats,playing positions or success on the pitch. .never seen such stupidity with pele, compating him with djalma santos,bellini or carlos alberto torres.
A Passarella vs maradona 1985/86 scenario simply doesn’t exist in the catalogue of Pele. so why would he be compared to a defender?(based on what exactly)
I saw All the whole matches ... of Diego Armando Maradona .... World Cup 1986 ... 90 ... 94 .. Napoles or Napoli 1984/85 ... until 1990/91 ... ( half season ) Diego Armando Maradona .. He was an improved and more complete Ronaldinho Gaucho But at the same time presenting the same problems and same virtues at Average . Maradona had a much stronger personality and leadership than Ronaldinho Gaucho Maradona..1986 World Cup.. 11 Won tackles... 8 interceptions 18 duels won it was an extremely complete version of Diego Maradona lasted until 1986/87 It was incredible, there were a lot of corner-kick pre-assists Then in 1987/88 he changed already Maradona had the same defects and the same virtues Of Ronaldinho Gaucho Highly negative points about Maradona and Ronaldinho Gaucho that I saw watching complete matches of them or both: Tackles won per 90 minutes : 0 Interceptions: 0 Defensive Covers :0 in the case of Ronaldinho Duels Won : 0 in the case of Ronaldinho lots of Yellow Cards and Red Cards (Fools) Generally most goals are scored through penalty kicks and Free Kicks Shots on Target Ratio % accuracy lower at average #EndProducts Problems with this at average in the case of Ronaldinho in Big matches Feel the Pressure deep inside shaking(fear) in decisions 0, 48 % behaviour from him in other words, Maradona was an improved and more +++ complete Ronaldinho but Argentina National Team side and Napoli were not dominant forces in the World Ronaldinho Gaucho had the advantage of playing on dominant forces sides in the World ... Brazil ... and FC Barcelona ... .......... Average points of both : passing accuracy Headers Won Highly positive points from both players: Key decisive Passes or Big chance Created Dribbles made per 90 minutes ( completed ) Top 40 in History in these aspects
You forget the assists from corners and set pieces too if you subtract the cross assists,the assists from corner kicks and the assists from freekicks you are left with 10~assists by Maradona at Napoli in terms of goals it is roughly 30~ freekicks for Napoli and 42 penalties(115 total goals) 63% of his total goals for Napoli were from set pieces The one who is overly reliant on set pieces/non open play situations to decide the outcome of matches doesn’t strike me as someone supremely confident. Nor as someone who is a elite level finisher one (positive)thing I will say about Maradona is that he was one of the best crossers of the ball i have seen in my life. He had the variety ,the range and the sheer volume of crosses too The crossing and general wing play ability of Diego Maradona is rarely touched on instead other aspects of his playmaking are overstated(throughballing for example) Zico was for me a clearly superior through ball specialist to Maradona Clear as day
I wouldn't make the mistake of considering ratings as the Holy Grail. It's true that Careca, for example, played a better UEFA Cup than Diego and it's true that the latter had a slight decline after the World Cup in Mexico '86 but this was something that could have happened at the time. Johan Cruyff also had a decline after the 1974 World Cup. But the fact remains that Maradona was still Napoli's most important and indispensable player, sometimes it's not just a technical question but also a question of the head and Maradona brought that winning mentality that only great legends can convey. I'll give you a small example: Salvatore Bagni seems to me to be Napoli's best player in terms of average rating, but do we really think he was more fundamental than Maradona for the final victory? Let's take Bagni away from Napoli, I think they would have won the scudetto anyway, if we take away Maradona I'm 100% sure not. So I agree that the narrative about Maradona is really very, very excessive but we shouldn't belittle it either.
His ratings on DBS Calcio are: 84/85 6.90 85/86 6.62 86/87 6.48 87/88 6.61 88/89 6.54 89/90 6.48 90/91 5.97 First four seasons average: 6.65 Last three seasons average: 6.33 Overall: 6.51 So except by 86/87 all his ratings are lower on the last three seasons than any of his first 4 seasons. He would look much more average and lower his overall rating if we count all the period in which he stayed there
Napoli spent a lot of money with transfers like De Napoli and Carnevale. Those two players along with Ferrara, Careca and the manager Bianchi would still win those titles I think. The team would be more collective or the manager would built the team around another player. Napoli had one of the best defences on série A at the time. It's just a myth that Maradona "singlehandedly" carried Napoli to those titles