These are some of mine:
-
Pepe was actually a better defender than Ramos, but Ramos’ knack for important goals (not a defender’s job) and what he won with Spain made him the better player in people’s eyes.
-
Courtois should have been in the top 3 of the ballon D’or ranking in 2022.
-
Xavi was a more complete midfielder than Iniesta. He pressed better, controlled games better, gave better weighted passes, and was also a good dribbler when pressed (Iniesta was the better dribbler overall). I’d say he was the better one.
-
Modric and Kroos have far bigger careers with Madrid than Zidane did.
-
Zidane and Ronaldinho were great players but were sometimes frustrating to watch and ineffective even in their primes. Their convoluted style of doing simple things made them highlight champions.
-
Luis Garcia generally played the biggest role in taking Liverpool to the UCL final in 2005, but his name is hardly mentioned when that UCL win is mentioned (Gerrard, the Scouse, vs Garcia, the foreigner)
-
Pique was a better defender than Puyol. The latter was prone to mistakes and making rash decisions, while Pique was far more intelligent.
-
Eto’o had a bigger impact in Barca than Suarez did. The former came in 2004 when Barca hadn’t won the league since ‘99. He became the league top scorer for two straight seasons as Barca won the league, then the league and UCL double. He also won the treble in 2008/09. Suarez, on the other hand, came when Barca were already dominant, but just having a bad spell.
-
Gerrard dived for the penalty which led to Liverpool’s equalizer in 2005 UCL final.
-
Carvalho is the most underrated defender in his generation. He was basically Mourinho’s wingman.
-
If Lampard played in this age, with those same stats, he’d be recognized as the best amongst the three.
What are yours?
Gerrard didn’t play for, nor carry a shit team between 2004-07. They were the 2nd toughest team to break down in that period (possible in Europe except MAYBE Milan) behind possibly the best defensive team of the prem era in Chelsea.
Stats should NOT be the first port of call when trying to compare players, especially attacking players.
Mousa Dembele was one of the best central midfielders to ever play in the prem, he just didn’t have the longevity or success of others.
Chelsea’s 15 goals conceded season is less likely to be broken than a quadruple, unbeaten season or another 100 pointer.
Van Dijk is a level above Vidic.
Mane at his best was better than Salah. In periods he was genuinely unplayable- more so than Salah.
Putting myself in defenders shoes, Drogba at his best would have been the single most difficult striker to defend against in the history of the prem.
The ballon d’Or gets FAR too much attention.
Ronaldinho was a bigger “what if” than R9.
Funny that, I agree with all of them (some more than others) EXCEPT the last one. And it’s a HARD DISAGREE.
The true Ronaldo was amazing before injury. He was odds-on to become the absolute GOAT, with only the “strictly striker” tax as a hindrance. But all about him was incredible, with and without the ball, powering it or finessing it, carrying the ball or striking it.
I think Ronaldinho reached his absolute ceiling at his peak at Barcelona. He went from being one of the best, and a bit of a “highlights merchant” just a bit better than say Denilson, to being very clearly the best player in the world for two-three years. I go with three because after a couple of months at FCB he was already it and even more “carrying the team”. It was an amazing growth. What if? He might have kept it up for what, a year or two being more professional? I actually doubt it. And his impact on games not being at that physical peak did hinder him a lot.
I don’t know, maybe it’s coming from a country with a lot of Futsal that has seen glorious Futsal players not cut the mustard at XIs.
But I’ll leave it at… Ronaldo Nazario had his career ending injury at what? 22? And was banging them in at elite level over 30, but limping. Ronaldinho dropped his level at what, 26-27? And then had a better physique than peak Maradona. And would anyone rate Ronaldinho over Ronaldo as a player? So the big what if is, what if there’s no leg break?
Unless you mean what if Ronaldinho didn’t sign for Barcelona? Would he have been considered the best player in the world at some point? Don’t get me wrong, I think Ronaldinho’s game raised the game of the squad, not the other way round. And Ronaldo’s FCB served pretty dire football. But it was that signing that had an enormous effect in him.
Same, I was on board till that last one
So many defenders talk about how Drogba being the most difficult striker to play against. Oddly, a lot of defenders from the early 2000s talk about Louis Saha being really difficult to mark as well.
His goal at Stamford bridge against Liverpool when he spun Carra(?) and left foot half volley past Reina, you can’t really do anything against that as a defender
Agree with everything except Ronaldinho and Ronaldo. No telling how great Ronaldo could have been without so many severe injuries.
For me it’s even just on natural ability with the ball at his feet from what i’ve seen, in Ronaldinho was the 2nd to Messi imo. He had too much fun playing football, nothing wrong with that given he won it all, but i’d love to have seen his career trajectory if he had it like CR7 between the ears.