How many seasons till Messi recognised as best ever?

dnmac4 wrote:

aford92 wrote:The World Cup is the biggest prize in football. If you do not win the best prize available in your sport then you cannot be the best ever. So until Messi wins a World Cup he cannot be considered the best ever imo.

This is just flat out non sense that one tournament can stain your career forever and make people forget every other trophy and record you have set.

Look at a player like Ibra, I'm part Swedish and respect our team alot but I'm also a realist and know we will never win the world cup anytime in his career no matter how well he ever would play in one.

Yes Messi comes from a nation that is better then Sweden and frankly will probably win a world cup again but who knows when. It's not his fault they have one of the worst defensive units and goalie selections of any "major" country in world football.

Look at Holland in the Euros, there defense was a lot weaker two years removed from being in the finals of the world cup and they got there ass kicked out of the Euro's with a terrible display even with the some of the best attacking talent in the world and a play maker in Sneijder that some would argue was the best player in the world two years ago.

Nobody on here had anything to say about RVP, Hunter, Robben, Sneijder, VDV etc but when Messi takes the field with an awful coach and a defense / Keeper that wouldn't be fit for a charity tournament somehow it's all Messi's fault.

Defense is key to National teams in tournaments as they don't get to practice a lot and most of them rely on there defense because it's a lot easier to park the bus or play defensivley then play free flowing offensive football with a bunch of guys who practice with each other a couple times a year. Look at this years Euro's if you need any proof. Portugal, England, Italy, Spain, Greece, Czech's, etc etc all take a defensive approach to the games.

Even SAF has said the CL is now bigger then the world cup and is the biggest tournament in the world and most difficult to win. The only reason the WC is Harder to win is it comes around every 4 years not every year. I mean if they had the World cup every year Spain would win every year for the last 4-5 years, hands down, it doesn't matter what Messi would do.

I'm just tired of people hanging it over the head of a 25 year old that since he has won everything but the WC he can't be considered this or that.

Odds are him and Ronaldo wont win the WC in there career's. They are both still incredible and are tearing apart the records of these so called players that are better then them because they won a world cup.

I am in no way saying that he isn't a brilliant player. But people are talking about him being the best ever, I'm not sure you realise how big of a statement that is, and for me you cannot be the best ever if you don't win the biggest, most prestigious and most difficult to win tournament. Regardless of what SAF says, anyone who use simple logic can see that the WC is more difficult to win that the CL for the very reason you stated.

Look at all the other players that are considered as candidates for the best ever, R9, Pele, Maradona. They all won at least 1 WC. It's like if a basketball player never won the NBA championship but win 10 MVP awards and Conference finals. Yes he's a fantastic player, but he cannot be the best unless he wins the ultimate prize. In football the ultimate prize is the WC.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

aford92 wrote:The World Cup is the biggest prize in football. If you do not win the best prize available in your sport then you cannot be the best ever. So until Messi wins a World Cup he cannot be considered the best ever imo.

Oddly enough Cruyff and Di Stefano never won these trophies, and yet everyone regards them as the best of their eras. Weird, huh?

Best of their era's. Not best ever. People seem to think that I'm bashing Messi, when all I'm saying is that I don't think he's the best player to ever play football, not really an insult.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

aford92 wrote:The World Cup is the biggest prize in football. If you do not win the best prize available in your sport then you cannot be the best ever. So until Messi wins a World Cup he cannot be considered the best ever imo.

Oddly enough Cruyff and Di Stefano never won these trophies, and yet everyone regards them as the best of their eras. Weird, huh?

But everyone considers the 2 kings of football Pele and Maradonna. What's similar about them? They dominated the World Cup.

Maradonna didn't win many trophies and doesnt have incredible stats, and yet he is considered the best. Why? He did herculean achievements, leading many underdogs to trophies. Messi hasnt done that, he will have a chance to do it though, in the World with Argentina, and in a few years with Barca.

Pele dominated everything, from club football to international football. Messi lacks the later.

aford92 wrote:Best of their era's. Not best ever. People seem to think that I'm bashing Messi, when all I'm saying is that I don't think he's the best player to ever play football, not really an insult.

No that's not what you're saying at all. You're saying having a world cup is a requisite for being a GOAT, which is simply not the case. I also don't think he, or anyone for that matter, can aspire to more than best of the era so that would be dandy as far as I'm concerned.

stunt wrote:But everyone knows the 2 kings of football are Pele and Maradonna. What's similar about them? They dominated international football.

Everyone who is less than 25 years old and knows very little about the sport thinks that. To the moderately more informed, they hold Cruyff, Di Stefano and Beckenbauer on the same regard.

I think Messi will definitely become the best ever. But as of now, he still has a ways to go in my opinion. 4 amazing seasons cant make.you the best ever. He needs to co.tinue on this levek for at least most of.his career, and at least bring Argentina far in the world cup. Id say if he continues on this level for another 3-4 years and brings Argentina to the WC final, and hell the best ever. Without any national team.achievments though he cant be considered the best. It couod alsi be argued that he should also prove himself in another league bssides the two-team-league that is called La Liga, but thats arguable.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:
Everyone who is less than 25 years old and knows very little about the sport thinks that. To the moderately more informed, they hold Cruyff, Di Stefano and Beckenbauer on the same regard.

Proof? Every poll or list FIFA has made has had either Pele or Maradonna at the top. It's undeniable. Di Stefano was great but he never won a WC, same with Cruyff. Beckenbauer was a defender.

If you ask someone to make a top5 of players, everyone will put Pele and Maradonna in their list. The other 3 change from person to person. People also chose players like Eusebio, Garrincha, Puskas, Platini, Best, Ronaldo, Zico, Muller, etc etc

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

aford92 wrote:Best of their era's. Not best ever. People seem to think that I'm bashing Messi, when all I'm saying is that I don't think he's the best player to ever play football, not really an insult.

No that's not what you're saying at all. You're saying having a world cup is a requisite for being a GOAT, which is simply not the case. I also don't think he, or anyone for that matter, can aspire to more than best of the era so that would be dandy as far as I'm concerned.

stunt wrote:But everyone knows the 2 kings of football are Pele and Maradonna. What's similar about them? They dominated international football.

Everyone who is less than 25 years old and knows very little about the sport thinks that. To the moderately more informed, they hold Cruyff, Di Stefano and Beckenbauer on the same regard.

When did anybody say those players weren't great? They are amazing. Di Stefano never played in a WC but Cruyff played brilliantly in '74 and Beckenbauer has won the WC.That's a big reason why they are right up there. The reason I have an issue with Messi being called the GOAT is because although has played at WC's he didn't perform. Just like I have no issue with people thinking players like Cruyff and Beckenbauer are up with the likes of Pele, Maradona and R9.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

aford92 wrote:Best of their era's. Not best ever. People seem to think that I'm bashing Messi, when all I'm saying is that I don't think he's the best player to ever play football, not really an insult.

No that's not what you're saying at all. You're saying having a world cup is a requisite for being a GOAT, which is simply not the case. I also don't think he, or anyone for that matter, can aspire to more than best of the era so that would be dandy as far as I'm concerned.

stunt wrote:But everyone knows the 2 kings of football are Pele and Maradonna. What's similar about them? They dominated international football.

Everyone who is less than 25 years old and knows very little about the sport thinks that. To the moderately more informed, they hold Cruyff, Di Stefano and Beckenbauer on the same regard.

Either a win or several brilliant performances are requisites. What do all the usual GOAT candidates have in common? Pele, R9, Maradona, Cruyff, Beckenbauer e.t.c They all either won or played brilliantly in at least 1 WC.

There isn't a doubt that he is the best of his era but to be considered with the likes of the players above, I think he must win 1 of or perform brilliantly at the next to WC's.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Everyone who is less than 25 years old and knows very little about the sport thinks that. To the moderately more informed, they hold Cruyff, Di Stefano and Beckenbauer on the same regard.

About cruyff, a lot of ajax fans didnt think he was their best player

Look, like 6 or 7 countries I think 7 now that Spain won there first World Cup have ever won the World cup. I'm not going to look it up but from my memory it's Uruguay, Brasil, Argentina, Germany, Italy, Spain and England? Basically if your not born in one of those countries then your not winning the World Cup and it has proved out year after year the same teams win this thing over and over again.

So basically by this logic which is why I brought up Ibra or hell throw in Eusebio or Figo they can never be considered the best ever. What if Messi 2.0 is born in Bolivia he just can't ever be the best ever according to this stupid rule? I know your not slamming him but the he can't be the best until he wins a world cup doesn't hold much water IMO.

And BTW the reason people say Maradona and Pele are the best and then the list starts after that and tie it to the World cup is because back then you didn't get to watch them every single week like we do today. The World Cup was usually the only time a lot of people got to actually watch them play.

It's like this today too. I got called all sorts of names when I kept saying to people on here a year or so ago when Jack Wilshire was healthy that there were 10-15 better players at his age in South America that are better then him but since I am one of the few people on here who actually watch SA football those people saw Wilshire play every week and thought I was insane.

Pele never went to Europe do you think a player today could do that and be named the best player ever? No freaking way. Times have changed.

I'm not just talking about Messi in my statement, you can throw Ronaldo in there too. They are spectacular players that are scoring goals at a pace never seen before year after year, and again IMO Ronaldo won't win a world cup so does that exclude him from the discussion of best player ever, does that mean him and Messi are just forgotten about. What if CR7 wins the Euro's and Messi wins Copa America people would still say it's not enough and it's insane IMO.

name thoughs 15 players please

dnmac4 wrote:They are spectacular players that are scoring goals at a pace never seen before year after year IMO.

thats factually incorrect, IMO

dnmac4 wrote:and again IMO Ronaldo won't win a world cup so does that exclude him from the discussion of best player ever

give him a world cup, hes still not in the discussion

It's not like Messi plays in a scrub NT team like Bolivia, he plays for freakin Argentina and has mates like Higuain, Aguero, Di Maria, Mascherano in his team, he should win it to shut everyones mouth. (not a hater I consider Messi as a top tier player of all-time)

dnmac4 wrote:Look, like 6 or 7 countries I think 7 now that Spain won there first World Cup have ever won the World cup. I'm not going to look it up but from my memory it's Uruguay, Brasil, Argentina, Germany, Italy, Spain and England? Basically if your not born in one of those countries then your not winning the World Cup and it has proved out year after year the same teams win this thing over and over again.

So basically by this logic which is why I brought up Ibra or hell throw in Eusebio or Figo they can never be considered the best ever. What if Messi 2.0 is born in Bolivia he just can't ever be the best ever according to this stupid rule? I know your not slamming him but the he can't be the best until he wins a world cup doesn't hold much water IMO.

And BTW the reason people say Maradona and Pele are the best and then the list starts after that and tie it to the World cup is because back then you didn't get to watch them every single week like we do today. The World Cup was usually the only time a lot of people got to actually watch them play.

It's like this today too. I got called all sorts of names when I kept saying to people on here a year or so ago when Jack Wilshire was healthy that there were 10-15 better players at his age in South America that are better then him but since I am one of the few people on here who actually watch SA football those people saw Wilshire play every week and thought I was insane.

Pele never went to Europe do you think a player today could do that and be named the best player ever? No freaking way. Times have changed.

I'm not just talking about Messi in my statement, you can throw Ronaldo in there too. They are spectacular players that are scoring goals at a pace never seen before year after year, and again IMO Ronaldo won't win a world cup so does that exclude him from the discussion of best player ever, does that mean him and Messi are just forgotten about. What if CR7 wins the Euro's and Messi wins Copa America people would still say it's not enough and it's insane IMO.

As I said earlier, either a win or several good performances are needed. All the best players either have a win or several good performances. Pele, R9, Maradona, Cruyff, Eusebio, Beckenbauer. They all have either one of those things, if not both. Considering how poor Messi has been in the WC's so far that fact he's already considered the GOAT by some is laughable.

stunt wrote:

BarrileteCosmico wrote:
Everyone who is less than 25 years old and knows very little about the sport thinks that. To the moderately more informed, they hold Cruyff, Di Stefano and Beckenbauer on the same regard.

Proof? Every poll or list FIFA has made has had either Pele or Maradonna at the top. It's undeniable. Di Stefano was great but he never won a WC, same with Cruyff. Beckenbauer was a defender.

If you ask someone to make a top5 of players, everyone will put Pele and Maradonna in their list. The other 3 change from person to person. People also chose players like Eusebio, Garrincha, Puskas, Platini, Best, Ronaldo, Zico, Muller, etc etc

FIFA player of the century: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_Player_of_the_Century

1. Pele 1705 (3xWC)
2. Cruyff 1303 (0xWC)
3. Beckenbauer 1228 (1xWC)
4. Di Stefano 1215 (0xWC)
5. Maradona 1214 (1xWC)

As you can see, Cruyff actually got second and even Di Stefano got, albeit by 1, more votes than Maradona. Even without WC. WC is the biggest prize, but it's not only prize.

urbaNRoots wrote:It's not like Messi plays in a scrub NT team like Bolivia, he plays for freakin Argentina and has mates like Higuain, Aguero, Di Maria, Mascherano in his team, he should win it to shut everyones mouth. (not a hater I consider Messi as a top tier player of all-time)

So does Holland. But there defense is suspect and you saw what happened to them in the Euro's. Does that make RVP a worse player, no not at all. But that is the treatment CR7 and Messi get. People set the bar so high.

His team simply doesn't have the defense and keeper to win a World Cup. I admit he's on a great team but like I have said in a previous post the same teams win this thing every year and there usually loaded. This argentina team is loaded in attack but they can only play 2-3 forwards at a time and they lack a creative midfield to link play as well. Yes they have very very good players in some of the midfield and defensive positions but when Messi drops back to link offense and defense he gets killed for not scoring. He cant win.

Not many if he continues to rack up team and personal titles. WC being the best player would be end all discussions though.

Thats interesting to see votes ended Maradona only 5th when many today consider him the best ever. That just tells the difference in time though, there are too many facotrs involved, there is virtually no way for ppl today to appreciate someone say 50 years ago in the sport the way they can someone whos playing today where they get to see him live.

I think a large degree of their votes and best ever tags are superficial anyway so I for one are not too concerned about what everyone thinks. Everyone means the public and u get all sorts of ppl, ppl who knows the sport, ppl who doesnt have a clue and ppl who know a bit, ppl who are biased and unbiased, its impossible to win over everyone. But I think Messi's achievement at 25 has been mroe than enough, the titles and records, and praise and respect hes won, has been enougha dn grerat. Whether or not everyone considers him for the best ever title isnt that important cos its somewhat superficial and not the most important thing.

World Cup is needed

Pele and Maradona did it who are generally recognised as the the top two

In recent history the same applies, Ronaldo/Zidane etc

dnmac4 wrote:

urbaNRoots wrote:It's not like Messi plays in a scrub NT team like Bolivia, he plays for freakin Argentina and has mates like Higuain, Aguero, Di Maria, Mascherano in his team, he should win it to shut everyones mouth. (not a hater I consider Messi as a top tier player of all-time)

So does Holland. But there defense is suspect and you saw what happened to them in the Euro's. Does that make RVP a worse player, no not at all. But that is the treatment CR7 and Messi get. People set the bar so high.

His team simply doesn't have the defense and keeper to win a World Cup. I admit he's on a great team but like I have said in a previous post the same teams win this thing every year and there usually loaded. This argentina team is loaded in attack but they can only play 2-3 forwards at a time and they lack a creative midfield to link play as well. Yes they have very very good players in some of the midfield and defensive positions but when Messi drops back to link offense and defense he gets killed for not scoring. He cant win.

I really agree dude. Argentina isnt a "scrub" team but there are still better teams (TEAMS being the key word because thats what it takes) than Argentina. Meaning that other countries have more players better suited to play more positions than "elite" teams like Argentina or Holland ATM (mainly defense, like mac said). It's a subjective thing to say because some will argue that a truly GOAT player can do it single-handedly, or they'll just say that a team like Argentina has so many class strikers, how can they lose???
But it takes a good team, an entire team.

Many will bring in Maradona as an example of how a player can be great enough to single-handedly win not one but two WCs. His wasn't a scrub team either. But how good was their competition aside from Germany at the time??? (I seriously ask this because I don't know. Nowadays I have an idea as to where Argentina's competition in pretty much any country can compete against them.) Everyone talks about how Diego won it, and it was an amazing feat but no one talks about the level of the competition so I just do not know how to gauge it. If someone has a very good idea of how to explain it I would really like to listen to it (and I say this with NO sarcasm even if it sounds that way. It would be cool to have a better idea of those tournaments.)

With that said, I know how Argentina compares to todays possible WC squads and realistically, how likely is a team like Argentina to beat a good Spain or Germany???? The team I mean, not 1 player having a beast day? This Argentina isn't that of the 80's and neither is their competition. And again, this is a very subjective issue because nothing is settled on paper. Understood. So let's get hypothetical. I have one question:

* Let's say Neymar (for the sake of example) leads Brazil to WC glory in 2014. On top of his success with Santos already (3 Paulistas, 1 Copa do Brasil and 1 Libertadores) he immediately leads Santos to a South American treble with Santos right after the WC, and takes the next possible Club world cup after that, beating the top European side of that year. Along the way, he bags a few top Serie a scoring titles. This would be undoubtedly a GOAT achievement, as that much success, for anyone is not simply due to luck. NOW, lets say Neymar for one reason or another never leaves Santos, or SA even. He could never possibly be considered a GOAT because he never stepped foot in Europe. Does that seem right??? I'll let you decide, but this scenario is like a funny reversal on Messi's case.


*This is of course hypothetical because kind of like How Messi doesn't have a clear WC favorite team ATM, Neymar does not have a Santos team even somewhat seemingly capable of this. But scrubs they are not, so it's not impossible either.