I genuinely wonder: how does this (and similar posts by you) square with the narrative of Maradona as an underdog footballer? In many narratives even the ultimate underdog footballer. I will then try formulate a nuanced reply of my own.
Underdog ? Maybe in his beginnings with Argentinos Juniors, some of those squads were really bottom half level calibre. But in general, I don’t think that term would entirely apply to him. I think there’s a misconception about the facts. He played for wealthy sides in Europe and for the defending NT world champs. But at that time there was more parity and he never was a part of a side that transcended as one of the all-time greatest clubs. Maybe 1986 Argentina warrants some place among the top 10 or 20 WC sides of all-time. Point is, I think people use the logic that of all the top political legends, his clubs or national team are never spoken as the crust of the best. The Pelé of Santos and Brazil were marveled world over for decades. Cruijff’s Ajax and the Dutch of 1974 are in the discussion. Real Madrid of Di Stefano and Puskas with Honved and his Hungarian legendary side. La Máquina of River Plate with Moreno and his 1947 NT. The Bayern Munich of Beckenbauer and the 1972-74 NT. The Milan of Arrigo Sacchi and maybe some side in England like Liverpool. In the last decade Barcelona and Real Madrid have made history. With Maradona you don’t get that reception. Also, most top 50 all-time player lists rarely feature teammates of his. So, I believe that impression of an “underdog” may be associated with legacy and how his teams are remembered. In the blink of an eye, it’s rare to pick out any of his teams and associate it with greatness. Also, some of his teams were despised (in harsh words) the 1990 World Cup side; the north of Italy hated Napoli and all that divisive intricacies that were going on. Argentinos Juniors and Sevilla played under the radar with less pressure for success and people don’t even remember them. Barcelona of the early 1980s was nothing to boast about and not marveled at all, with many times semi-empty seats and frequently criticized by their play from the press. He was not particularly liked in Spain or in half of Italy because he was on the south and of the money (most expensive in the world) and fame he was receiving; it pushed opponents the wrong way. That no longer is simply the case nowadays. Underdog ? Don’t think so, but neither a clear favorite for most of his teams. And yes, he had beneficial situations and adverse circumstances in his career.
Paisley is better in trophies number but Liverpool foundation is mainly creditable to Bill Shankly. Importantly, Paisley career is relatively short only 9 season.
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_Cruyff#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Armando_Maradona#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferenc_Puskás#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelé#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerd_Müller#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zico#Registros_goleadores https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfredo_Di_Stéfano#Estadísticas https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Platini#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronaldo#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_van_Basten#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionel_Messi#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cristiano_Ronaldo#Estadísticas https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romário#Resumen_estadístico https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinedine_Zidane#Estadísticas https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Best#Resumen_estadístico
@Dearman I think Neymar is too low on your list of best forwards.i get that he’s young and lacks the longevity of other players but he has maintained the level of a top 5 player in the world since 2015 and even before had notable achievements(solid performance in wc 14 and confed Cup 2013) I don’t see how he can be ranked behind Kevin Keegan and Dalglish who were simply very good players in a weak era(late 70s in Europe was poor) Neymar would’ve easily won multiple ballon dors in that era(if he was eligible) Even totti being ranked above him is pretty inexplicable. Totti was never a undisputed top 3 player in Europe (not even once)this is a player who was also clearly inferior to prime Del Piero. Totti had a long career but longevity is overrated if you consider post 06/07 never competed for best player in his own league (let alone Europe) Neymars prime is currently at the level of Thierry Henry a season or two should see he displace him. I don’t think many fans are actually watching him or perhaps the last time they watched him was late 2015 check his who scored ratings for dribbling and playmaking over the past couple seasons.they are off the charts(on par with Lionel Messi) A source that you may be aware of also ranks his playmaking abilities on par with prime Ronaldinho Ronaldinho 05/06 Short pass accuracy:91 Long pass accuracy:93 Neymar (PSG) Short pass accuracy:93 Long pass accuracy:92 https://pesstatsdatabase.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3991 https://pesstatsdatabase.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7365 This isn’t far fetched at all.neymar is also the same age dinho was in his last great season 05/06 If your not convinced here is a comp of playmaking from one season 2017/18. Many ligue 1 fans I have spoken to have confirmed that what Neymar accomplished in that half season was greater in quality than what ibrahimovic,Ronaldinho,cavani,Falcao ever showed in many seasons in France.
I've reviewed Neymar's rating as you requested. As a result, he remains being placed at the same place. His years at Barcelona is overshadowed by Messi and Luis Suarez and he is rated in supreme-world-class in only his first season at PSG where he played only half of season. Dalglish and Keegan played twice more seasons than Neymar in his current age so it should have not been overstatement that they're deserved in higher places.
@Dearman, what about James? As great as Eden Hazard played at the World Cup, James's performance in Brazil is the greatest this century.
You haven’t taken into consideration the level of competition in this era Judging by your own criteria neymar competed against two top 10 all timers in their prime I don’t understand how neymar could only be supreme world class in 17/18 He was according to some sources the best player in La Liga 2016/17 and also one of the main stars (top 5)of the league and champions league in 14/15,15/16 and 16/17 Neymar in wc 2014 wasn’t inferior to Figo in Euro 2000(not to mention the euros are traditionally held in a lower rank to the World Cup) yet you have Figo as a top 5 all time winger but neymar not even top 15 forward When did players like keegan,Figo,dalglish ever experience this level of dominance in their careers I think that it is astounding that a lack of longevity didn’t become a problem for you when you ranked Ronaldinho gaucho a top 25 player in football history based on 2-3 years of prime performance This is historical revisionism at it’s finest.i defy any poster to find me evidence of Ronaldinho being ranked so highly pre 2006 After 2006 Ronaldinho had no notable achievements that could’ve increased his all time ranking(even if its arguable that he was world class for Milan in 2009/10) Neymar doesn’t have any signature performances to compare to Ronaldinho but he also doesn’t have an inferior skillset. He has shown at PSG a level of playmaking equal to Ronaldinho and a level in dribbling Ronaldinho did not reach Not to mention he has always been a demonstrably better goal scorer. Are you saying that if this season neymar was to dominate against Real Madrid,Bayern Munich etc and win the champions league while maintaining a similar level in the league he would jump from top 100 all time to top 30? If so I believe your criteria is flawed. Too much emphasis is placed on great moments (hence your inclusion of zidane in the top 15) and not enough on overall skillset zidane had the technique and wow factor of a top 10 all timer but his skillset was inferior to the likes of platini,cruyff and zico (in passing and scoring both by not a small but huge margin) Ronaldinho didn’t have the mentality of George best to be in the same rank Ronaldinho choked in the 06 final George best didn’t in 68 Dinho also never brought his best form to the NT in his prime to be ranked in the top 50 all time list
As updated for the 1st half 2018 - 2019 season, Messi has become the greatest domestic performer ever as his score is currently equal to that of Maradona. In overall score, only 0.2 in gap to equalize Maradona's score. Eden Hazard and Neymar has been ranked up around 3 places. Lewandowski who is rated in 2.5 world-class seasons has seemingly qualified for top 50 strikers of all-time but he has never gotten to success in any international country tournament. As calculated, he still follow Ian Rush by a significant margin.
Besides Neymar and Hazard, are James, Salah, Griezmann and De Bruyne ranked for positional hall of fame?
Lewandowski has only had 2.5 world class seasons I’m genuinely intrigued at how at striker who is almost a top 5 scorer in Bundesliga history,the first player to score 30 league goals in Germany since Gerd Muller,a player who scored 5 goals in 9 minutes,scored 4 goals in a single match against Real Madrid,scored over 40 goals in a single season on three separate occasions only “seemingly” qualifies as a top 50 all time striker
An old post Dearman but a few thoughts if I may... Can't see how Guardiola is ranked so high, much less ahead of Mourinho. Mourinho will very likely go down as the last manager to lead a team outside the Top 5 Leagues to be European Champions, with Porto. He did this after winning the UEFA Cup in the year prior. What he did with that team, in the 21st century, is... unfathomable, at best. Additionally, Mourinho led Inter Milan to not only their first European Cup since the 60s, he led them to the ONLY treble in all of Italian football history. A feat that no Juventus or Milan side were able to achieve. Astounding. If we consider what he did with Chelsea, and the positive aspects of his Real Madrid career, these achievements in total completely surpass whatever Guardiola has done IMO. Guardiola's best achievement is actually more or less replicated by Luis Enrique, who led Barcelona to a treble. Are they the same achievements? No. But a His career at Bayern was insignificant, and his time at Manchester City is certainly nothing to write home about with respect to 'All-Time Achievements'. And trust me, I think what Mourinho has become in recent years is... nothing short of a joke. But his best achievements, specifically with Porto and Inter, hold unique places in football history. What Guardiola did with Barcelona, his best achievement by far, proved not to be unique given that Luis Enrique was able to more or less replicate it (although obviously Guardiola deserves credit for molding that team, to a degree). Not a shock given the players at their disposal. Messi, Xavi and Iniesta are not the players they were because of Guardiola. They were as talented as they were, regardless of Guardiola, and this is an important fact to remember. Guardiola had these players, in their prime, at his disposal. Does he deserve credit for the achievements? Absolutely. Getting rid of Ronaldinho, Deco, etc. But there's much more difficult achievements in football than properly creating a team centered around three of the best players in history. What Mourinho did with Porto and Inter surpass whatever Guardiola has done in his career, IMO. Both unique and historic achievements in European football history. Guardiola's Barcelona never even won back-to-back CL titles. Very overrated side.
Turning around that Barcelona team was a bigger achievement that most give Guardiola credit for. They went from finishing 3rd, with an aging squad, to being one of the greatest team of all time. How many teams can make that jump? Very few managers can come into a team in decline, had the balls to get rid of the big names (Thuram, Ronaldinho, Deco, and Zambrotta), promote youngsters, and take that new team (Pique, Alves, Busquets, and Keita were all new players) to reach a height that few teams in HISTORY could even match. The fact that he can take a team to win the treble on his first ever season is a unique achievement in and of itself. Think of all the things that could go wrong. New manager needs time to implement his ideas. Players need time to adapt. New manager needs time and money to strengthen his squad. New manager needs to get rid of deadwood. Etc. Guardiola did all of that in his first season. That's ridiculous! Remember that this was also Spain's first ever treble as well, except Barcelona didn't win 4 league titles in a row before achieving this, like Inter did. Guardiola also deserves A LOT of credit for developing the players. You take their talent for granted. I guess Ferguson deserves no credit for developing CR7 either? You think Messi jumped from 16 goals in 40 games to 38 goals in 51 games in a single season through sheer talent alone? How good was Iniesta for Barcelona before the arrival of Guardiola? Keep in mind that he was 24 years old when Guardiola arrived, so he wasn't too young to have won some inidividual awards by then, but of course, he hasn't won anything yet. Within one season, he was named La Liga's best Spanish player, La Liga best attacking midfielder, 2nd in the Di Stefano's Award, and won the Onze de Bronze, and inducted into FIFPRO World XI, and UEFA TotY. What about Pique and Busquets. The former was bench player in Manchester, and the latter was playing for Barcelona B. Unlike Iniesta, neither one was part of the EURO 2008 championship. Guardiola seamlessly integrated both in their first season. That alone is not easy. Pique won the Don Balon award for breakthrough player of 2009, while Busquets won the LFP breakthrough player of 2009. Guardiola, in his first season, managed to get TWO players to 'breakthrough player of the season' level. There are other cases like Yaya Toure becoming Ivorian Coast PotY for the first time in Guardiola's first season. We see him having similar effects on the likes of John Stone, Raheem Sterling, and Leroy Sane. Even if the players were responsible for their own improvements, Guardiola simply lucked out on so many players becoming world-class players in his first season, he still deserves a lot of credit for implementing the system that brings out the best in them. How many managers fail to fully utilize the talent at his disposal? Guardiola's system highlighted the talents of Pique, Alves, Xavi, Busquets, Iniesta, and Messi. He chose to build the team around Xavi. That's another achievement. He should be given extra credit for the actual style of football his team played. Just as Arrigo Sacchi did with AC Milan, Guardiola helped football as a whole evolve. That's something special. Winning the league, in three different countries, 7 out of the 9 full seasons also shouldn't be taken for granted. Most managers don't have that kind of consistency over a decade. It also wasn't just about winning. It's not just about the style of play, which has been entertaining and attacking everywhere he's managed. It's the level of domination. Barcelona didn't just win the La Liga, they dominated. So did Bayern Munich. With City last year, he set a new record for most points (100), most away points (50), most points ahead of second (19), most wins (32), most away wins (16), most goals (106), best goal difference (+79) and most consecutive victories (18). Right now, I'd agree Mourinho deserves to be placed higher, but Pep has every chance of overtaking Mourinho.
Some of the stuff here is absolutely shocking. Messi's legacy is inflated because "he plays on a stacked team in Spain", but Argentinians who played in the fckin 40s and never left the continent are all amazing and very underrated.
You make many good points and I believe we are more or less aligned, although I disagree with your last statement of "Pep has every chance of overtaking Mourinho" namely because, well, virtually your entire post was dedicated to his Barcelona achievements because everything else he's done doesn't compare. I'm not so sure that will change to the point where he would then supersede Mourinho, which you yourself state should be currently ranked ahead. He's young enough where it certainly is a possibility but at this point I'm not seeing where this will come from. Good point concerning it being the first treble in Spain, I don't believe I was aware of that. Regarding the development of Messi, you make a great point in Guardiola's influence on his goalscoring. Worth considering, and remembering, however that Messi was on an upwards trajectory at that point. Two years prior to that he was behind Kaka and CR7, the year after he was behind CR7. He was making his climb regardless and still had impressive goalscoring achievements up to that point (El Classico hat-tricks, solid CL goal-record in 07-08,etc.) Not to mention he was hampered by injuries in that 2007-2008 season which I'm sure had an impact on him. Nonetheless, Guardiola most certainly did have an impact on Messi's development, particularly with respect to goalscoring. And yes, while Guardiola did a lot of rebuilding, he was building off a team that was very recently European Champions and had a solid base to go off of. Iniesta also wasn't such an unknown as you're making him out to be. He was 24 as you state and still building himself up, just as Xavi was. Both him and Xavi were on the bench in the 2006 CL Final, with Xavi not even playing. But by the end of 2008, he was Euro 2008 Player of the Tournament. Iniesta was also crucial to Spain's win, featuring in the Team of the Tournament. They both achieved this before Guardiola, and naturally made larger impacts as they found the former Barcelona midfield that were CL 2006 champions to contend with. That isn't to say that their development wasn't largely marked by Guardiola, as Messi's was, but these two, particularly Xavi, were already showing their stuff prior to Guardiola and on a very upward trajectory regardless. Good points and arguments though.
I agree and also believe Maradona his club career is pushed up to absurd heights. Maradona in an Argentina shirt was maybe the best ever, yes, but this are the naked facts about his 'single best ever' club career: 2.5 league titles and twice runners-up in twenty years while usually playing for the richest or 2nd richest team of the league (practically all but three full seasons). Plus guys as Grondona, Allodi and Moggi providing the logistics and back-up. One continental final (that he won, with a handball ) and zero semi finals, while individually not much remains standing if you take away his gazillion penalties (and set piece assists). That is not phenomenal compared to the wins and near-wins (runners-up + semis, the deep runs) other legends can show for their club career. No, he didn't play for 1950s Real Madrid, that's important to know, but even then...
It kinda depends how dominant he was in Argentina, I havent seen enough about it to comment. His EC runs also don't really blow me away (often outperformed by teammates) Sure he was great in Italy, but could you say that he seperated himself decisively from Platini? What do you think how does Maradona's club career only stack up to Cruyff?
I don’t think even his career in Argentina would be a tie breaker First you(or someone) would have to establish that the Argentine primera division was comparable to A top 5 European league in the mid to late 70s Puck showed a while ago now that the top scorers in Argentina generally struggled to make remotely the same impact when they came to Europe Based purely on a visual test without getting into strength of the league(from top to bottom) maradona in argentinos juniors and boca reached a level above and beyond anything he showed in Italy I think recollections of his Napoli career are completely shrouded in myths You often hear(for me from my elder siblings and father) that maradona was some sort of dribbling machine beating player after player in Italy The fact is most comps that I’ve watched or made are of him pre Bilbao injury in 83 Afterwards with the exception of World Cup 1986 he seldom went on those spell binding runs The dribbling run he produced in 1985/86 when he beat like 5 juventus players is literally the only dribble he made in Napoli I can recall of that would make it onto Messis highlight reel of greatest dribbles (Admittedly He was still great in one on One situations at least till 1991 but rarely did you see him take on 3+players successfully in one run)
Without World Cup ‘86 Maradona’s legacy would be entirely different. His club career, as I’ve discussed numerous times, doesn’t come close to what the likes of Pele, CR7 or Messi achieved. Now, given that his ‘86 performance is considered the best international tournament performance of all time that needs to be considered. It was the World Cup. That’s very impressive. But it was still a tournament that consisted of a very minor percentage of his whole career. If Maradona wins that World Cup, but doesn’t score that amazing solo goal against England, would opinion of him at the time have been the same? Of course not. That single goal was an added layer. The real kicker: The above mentioned goal and winning the tournament thereafter, came after illegally and unshamingly scoring a goal with his hand. If that play is called correctly, the entire sequence of events afterwards would be different, particularly considering that would mean Argentina didn’t get that goal. And lastly, this was a guy who had a cocaine addiction throughout his career. He had GOAT-level talent but he did not have the discipline to consistently show World Cup 86 levels of greatness. Pele was crucial in 1958 up to 1970 for Brazil, transforming Santos along the way. Concerning longevity and consistency, we don’t need to elaborate there with respect to Messi or CR7. Maradona was what he was in 86 and only 8 years later disgraced himself at World Cup 94. If Maradona played today and was a contemporary to Messi and CR7, they would both leave him trailing so far in their dust it wouldn’t be funny. Dust he’d probably mistake for cocaine. No coke addict will be able to handle the competitiveness and stress of the modern game for too long, much less challenge those two. Overrated, even if his talent wasn’t.
I’ve always and will continue to respect Dearman’s work but just to show the type of aura surrounding Maradona that simply does not reflect reality: From Dearman’s “The Greatest Performers in a Single Domestic Season” http://xtrahistory.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-greatest-individual-performer-in.html?m=1 Ranked #1, as the best domestic season by a player EVER is Maradona’s 84-85 season at Napoli. The first sentence of the post demonstrates how absurdly and confusingly overrated Maradona is. “Although Napoli was unsuccessful in Series A, finishing 8th place and lost 7 matches, Maradona's average seasonal rating in this season is 7.03, one of the highest ever in history of Italian Series A. “ Let’s consider the fact that if Messi or CR7 aren’t leading their clubs to the CL title and scoring a goal a game along the way, they’re considered as underperforming. Maradona leads his team to a mid table spot in Serie A and that’s the best domestic achievement in the game’s history? Does not compute. Also, personally, Platini 84 > Maradona 86
Thing is that almost every nation has a guy from before television who has (legitimately) a legendary status. E.g. Netherlands has Lenstra (see the discussion in the thread, about the record number of streets named after him, stadium named after him, the high number of goals he had including multiple goals against all the neighboring countries), Belgium has Coppens/Mermans, Germany has Walter, England has a few dudes (when they were 'the best'), you name it. To put it harsh: Europeans are capable of giving this a proper place, but the sheer latin fantasist bandwagon upgrades those folks to incredible heights. While, and this must be repeated infinitely, the false superiority complex was punctured brutally once they exited their self-enforced isolation. Czechoslovakia and Masopust reduced Argentina to toilet paper (6-0) while they entered the tournament with the belief they had the single best footballers and they played the best football. At league level Maradona was maybe marginally better. Platini is superior in non-penalty goals and also superior with his assists (a gap that increases when taking open play assists) but Platini wasn't the same athlete and devastating force. I'm a fan of the player Platini precisely because he relied on his technique (could play amazing passes with his weaker left foot), timing, and not on his stamina or acceleration, although he was a deceptively effective dribbler. Juventus with Platini became 'only' marginally better, although Napoli without Maradona was also strong (he missed the first five matches of the 1989-90 season, and Napoli was the leader in the table, one point clear of the rest; Napoli also still very strong between 1990 and 1992, in particular at scoring goals). What Platini did at continental level is imho vastly superior (also his best games for St Etienne). Some superb games with Juventus, three finals in a row and helped to make Juventus a lot steadier at that level. Way more (open play) goals and assists, against some strong teams as Liverpool too. Domestically Juventus didn't become *that* much better, in Europe, always a slightly different animal for them, they did. While domestically it might be splitting hairs, at continental level it is a slam dunk (imho). Better achievements and better performances. As you say, also not as often (clearly) outperformed by a couple team-mates. (haven't forgotten/ignored the other question but will answer tomorrow or friday)