Cristiano Ronaldo should go down as top 5-6 players of all time

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

I don't know why/how anyone compares modern players (2000 on) with ones from previous eras. Just completely different games.

You look at the clips of Pele, Eusebio and so on, and the balls are heavy and different, the pitches were rough and uneven, the sports science wasn't there, and the players weren't, on average, the same quality as professionals are now.

In those days you would stand out with some talent/skill, but that alone wouldn't get you a contract now - you need to be an elite athlete, a skilled player, and have an incredible mentality.


As contentious as it is, I can imagine CR still looking good back then, but I can't see the likes of Best/Gazza getting near top teams in this age, if that makes sense. The main issue, for me, is that the overall quality has increased and so the top players now don't stand out as much as they did back then, making them seem less incredible.

Imagine a Harry Kane playing against defenders who have a pint before kick off, for example, or having 40-odd game league seasons like Shearer did.

i agree it’s difficult to compare generations. But the rest of your post is both completely dismissive of previous generations.

of course you can’t plonk a player from the 60’s into the modern game. But, it’s not just about being an athlete, talent, mentality and innate ability are also important.

you’ve used the example of Best and Gazza - but failed to recognise that if they were in a modern environment, then their lifestyles would be remarkably different - and they wouldn’t be the players that they were.

mentality is also era specific, some of these guys would have grown up during the war, worked other jobs, and earned bugger all as footballers - who has/ had the better mentality?

 

[Lord SInister]

I am sure this will deserve a thread on its own, with many counter arguments.

For a start, peak Best is simply a better dribbler and more talented footballer. He also managed to score a lot of goals as a winger (in his peak season he scored 32 goals, playing in the wing. That was unheard back in those time, when there is no such thing as modern goalscoring wing forward).

Pele also once said, Best is the greatest ever player in the world too.

In terms of Ballon D’or, FF has make a reassessment of Ballon D’or presented before 1995 to include players from all countries. Pele would win 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 70. But Best is still winner in 68. Which means, regardless of longevity/consistency, Best still has at least 1 year during his peak which he has outperformed Pele during his active peak period (58-70).

Pele also said Chicharito reminded him of Messi. Pele the speaker is PR machinery.

I love Georgie Best, he is my favorite player, but as good as he was, Pele was phenomenal. He was what Messi is today, a dribbler, creator/play maker and goal scorer all in one, with insanely prolific output. Pele wasn't exactly a striker either, Coutinho, Vava were the out and out strikers in his teams, during his prime. You can argue George Best was as good as Pele 's level, which is also debatable but better than him, no chance.

 

[slyadams]

i agree it’s difficult to compare generations. But the rest of your post is both completely dismissive of previous generations.

of course you can’t plonk a player from the 60’s into the modern game. But, it’s not just about being an athlete, talent, mentality and innate ability are also important.

you’ve used the example of Best and Gazza - but failed to recognise that if they were in a modern environment, then their lifestyles would be remarkably different - and they wouldn’t be the players that they were.

mentality is also era specific, some of these guys would have grown up during the war, worked other jobs, and earned bugger all as footballers - who has/ had the better mentality?

I think the point is that the 'flawed' characters back then could get by as top players. Let's say George Best was trying to play now, what is more likely to win out: his destructive personality or the more professional football culture. Unfortunately I think the former, maybe he'd be known in the same way we think about someone like Ravel Morrison.

The Football Ramble had a series called "Ramble Meets" where they spoke to a lot of top professionals and pretty much every single one said they were nowhere near the most talented players in their group growing up, but they wanted it more and worked harder and that a whole bunch of kids dropped out along the way chasing booze, girls etc. I think its true to say the further back you go the more you could couple such behaviour with professional football.

 

[Sky1981]

Some people just hate ronaldo and would paint him lower no matter what he did.

The fact that he can go 5 - 6 toe to toe with messi is a testament of how good he is.

 

[Gio]

I am sure this will deserve a thread on its own, with many counter arguments.

For a start, peak Best is simply a better dribbler and more talented footballer. He also managed to score a lot of goals as a winger (in his peak season he scored 32 goals, playing in the wing. That was unheard back in those time, when there is no such thing as modern goalscoring wing forward).

Pele also once said, Best is the greatest ever player in the world too.

In terms of Ballon D’or, FF has make a reassessment of Ballon D’or presented before 1995 to include players from all countries. Pele would win 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 70. But Best is still winner in 68. Which means, regardless of longevity/consistency, Best still has at least 1 year during his peak which he has outperformed Pele during his active peak period (58-70).

But your point was that Best's peak was superior to Pele's peak - not that Best in 1968 was better than Pele circa 1968. This is probably not the most objective place to discuss it, but I don't think there was much global consensus that peak Best was better than peak Pele. The majority view is that nobody really touched Pele's top performance level until Maradona came along in the 1980s.

 

[cjj]

I think the point is that the 'flawed' characters back then could get by as top players. Let's say George Best was trying to play now, what is more likely to win out: his destructive personality or the more professional football culture. Unfortunately I think the former, maybe he'd be known in the same way we think about someone like Ravel Morrison.

The Football Ramble had a series called "Ramble Meets" where they spoke to a lot of top professionals and pretty much every single one said they were nowhere near the most talented players in their group growing up, but they wanted it more and worked harder and that a whole bunch of kids dropped out along the way chasing booze, girls etc. I think its true to say the further back you go the more you could couple such behaviour with professional football.

This, basically.

There are stories about some of the top, top, players from the 60's or 70's who were terrible in training, if they turned up, but they'd be MotM on a Saturday. They wouldn't get picked these days.

There's a huge requirement from a lot of modern forwards for them to be competent at pressing and defending, too - something which many flair players would flat out refuse.

I'm not sure that the counter in the other post that Gazza/Best would simply have changed their personality/lifestyle sticks. I imagine there are Gazza/Best regens (of sorts, the realistic equivalent) that simply don't end up with contracts and are on building sites.

 

[RedRonaldo]

But your point was that Best's peak was superior to Pele's peak - not that Best in 1968 was better than Pele circa 1968. This is probably not the most objective place to discuss it, but I don't think there was much global consensus that peak Best was better than peak Pele. The majority view is that nobody really touched Pele's top performance level until Maradona came along in the 1980s.

I thought Best peak reach near to similar level as Maradona. But that’s just me. I could only judge from limited footage I’ve watched. Peak Best impressed me a lot (I enjoy watching footage of him more than Pele)

 

[meamth]

Best in modern day football would be the next Ravel Morrison.

Can't be a top professional.

 

[Gehrman]

I think the point is that the 'flawed' characters back then could get by as top players. Let's say George Best was trying to play now, what is more likely to win out: his destructive personality or the more professional football culture. Unfortunately I think the former, maybe he'd be known in the same way we think about someone like Ravel Morrison.

The Football Ramble had a series called "Ramble Meets" where they spoke to a lot of top professionals and pretty much every single one said they were nowhere near the most talented players in their group growing up, but they wanted it more and worked harder and that a whole bunch of kids dropped out along the way chasing booze, girls etc. I think its true to say the further back you go the more you could couple such behaviour with professional football.

Personally I think if Best had played today, he'd rather down the latter of being a professional especially if managed by Fergie. I might be giving him too much credit on that account though.

 

[Lord SInister]

I think the point is that the 'flawed' characters back then could get by as top players. Let's say George Best was trying to play now, what is more likely to win out: his destructive personality or the more professional football culture. Unfortunately I think the former, maybe he'd be known in the same way we think about someone like Ravel Morrison.

The Football Ramble had a series called "Ramble Meets" where they spoke to a lot of top professionals and pretty much every single one said they were nowhere near the most talented players in their group growing up, but they wanted it more and worked harder and that a whole bunch of kids dropped out along the way chasing booze, girls etc. I think its true to say the further back you go the more you could couple such behaviour with professional football.

George Best was never Ravel Morrison kind of dumbass though. Plus he was always hungry for success and achievements.

 

[Gehrman]

George Best was never Ravel Morrison kind of dumbass though. Plus he was always hungry for success and achievements.

Yeah I can him remember him saying he was massively frustrated with lack of ambition of the club and his team mates after they won the European Cup. He felt that a lot on team felt they had exhuasted their hunger then while he wanted Man Utd to become the British Real Madrid.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

International football is not held in such a high regard as it once was. With the current Champions League format and more international transfers creating greater club sides, the World Cup is not the absolute pinnacle that it use to be (in my opinion, of course). Times change.

They don't really change though when rating players of the past across many leagues, sometimes in different continents. The World Cup is the same for everyone. Ronaldo and Messi had super teams at their peak, teams assembled of some of the best players in their era. Pele and Maradona never played on anywhere near as good of a club team.

One of the main ways to compare Ronaldo and Messi to Puskas to Pele to Cruyff to Maradona to Ronaldo is the World Cup. It's the one constant in every career - apart from someone like Best who played for too weak of a team to qualify or Di Stefano's strange case. But Ronaldo has played 17 games at the World Cup.

Eusebio has more goals in 6 games than Ronaldo has in 17 games at the World Cup. Whatever way you spin it, Ronaldo has not played anywhere near as well at the World Cup as other great players, it's a blot on his resume. And he's had more chances than anyone else.

 

[Lord SInister]

Yeah I can him remember him saying he was massively frustrated with lack of ambition of the club and his team mates after they won the European Cup. He felt that a lot on team felt they had exhuasted their hunger then while he wanted Man Utd to become the British Real Madrid.

exactly, he carried United at one point post the 1968/69 season until his off field indulgences made him an enemy of the team and than he left.

 

[Lord SInister]

They don't really change though when rating players of the past across many leagues, sometimes in different continents. The World Cup is the same for everyone. Ronaldo and Messi had super teams at their peak, teams assembled of some of the best players in their era. Pele and Maradona never played on anywhere near as good of a club team.

One of the main ways to compare Ronaldo and Messi to Puskas to Pele to Cruyff to Maradona to Ronaldo is the World Cup. It's the one constant in every career - apart from someone like Best who played for too weak of a team to qualify or Di Stefano's strange case. But Ronaldo has played 17 games at the World Cup.

Eusebio has more goals in 6 games than Ronaldo has in 17 games at the World Cup. Whatever way you spin it, Ronaldo has not played anywhere near as well at the World Cup as other great players, it's a blot on his resume. And he's had more chances than anyone else.

Santos 1960s were a super duper team. They are quite underrated tbh.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Santos 1960s were a super duper team. They are quite underrated tbh.

They were and 1980s Napoli were no slouches either. But Barcelona and Real Madrid at different times in the 2010s were among the best club teams in history, and a massive, massive gap between the best teams and the average team in La Liga that allowed them to accumulate insane goalscoring numbers.

In 11/12, Real Madrid finished 39 points ahead of 3rd. Barcelona 30 points ahead, it's rare to have ever seen such a gap in a top league.

 

[SportingCP96]

Pele is still greater than CR7 and Messi

Simply not possible.

 

[Gio]

I thought Best peak reach near to similar level as Maradona. But that’s just me. I could only judge from limited footage I’ve watched. Peak Best impressed me a lot (I enjoy watching footage of him more than Pele)

True - his dribbling and balance is so easy on the eye - very few players have had that mesmerising control of their hips whilst withstanding all sorts of tackles. That's where I'd disagree with the poster above that him and Gascoigne wouldn't cope in the modern game. Those qualities they had were timeless.

I think the point is that the 'flawed' characters back then could get by as top players. Let's say George Best was trying to play now, what is more likely to win out: his destructive personality or the more professional football culture. Unfortunately I think the former, maybe he'd be known in the same way we think about someone like Ravel Morrison.

The Football Ramble had a series called "Ramble Meets" where they spoke to a lot of top professionals and pretty much every single one said they were nowhere near the most talented players in their group growing up, but they wanted it more and worked harder and that a whole bunch of kids dropped out along the way chasing booze, girls etc. I think its true to say the further back you go the more you could couple such behaviour with professional football.

Indeed. I'm not sold those are the best examples though. Gascoigne's career was already curtailed because of his destructive streak. He had the potential to be one of the greatest midfielders of all time and was arguably the most talented number 8 there's been. His peak years were diluted because of his injuries, the cruciate at 24, the further knee injury a few months later when out on the sesh, the leg break at 26 and then ultimately washed up at 30. Yet even at 29 at Euro '96 he was running the show, running rings around the fittest and most professional opposition Europe could offer up. I don't think that's anything to do with a lack of professionalism in the game because the players he faced - Clarence Seedorf, Dieter Eilts, John Collins, Miguel Nadal and others - were all impressive athletes whose long careers and physical standards remain well above par for footballers 'even' today.

 

[Spaghetti]

They don't really change though when rating players of the past across many leagues, sometimes in different continents. The World Cup is the same for everyone. Ronaldo and Messi had super teams at their peak, teams assembled of some of the best players in their era. Pele and Maradona never played on anywhere near as good of a club team.

One of the main ways to compare Ronaldo and Messi to Puskas to Pele to Cruyff to Maradona to Ronaldo is the World Cup. It's the one constant in every career - apart from someone like Best who played for too weak of a team to qualify or Di Stefano's strange case. But Ronaldo has played 17 games at the World Cup.

Eusebio has more goals in 6 games than Ronaldo has in 17 games at the World Cup. Whatever way you spin it, Ronaldo has not played anywhere near as well at the World Cup as other great players, it's a blot on his resume. And he's had more chances than anyone else.

6 and 17 games is an extremely small sample size and there are lots of mitigating circumstances. And by this reckoning, Miroslav Klose would be the GOAT, but he’s clearly not. Oleg Salenki (?) scored more WC goals in 1 match than 99% of players will in their lives, but he’s not considered.

I get what you mean in general though, but I still don’t think that players live for the WC like they used to.

 

[Sky1981]

6 and 17 games is an extremely small sample size and there are lots of mitigating circumstances. And by this reckoning, Miroslav Klose would be the GOAT, but he’s clearly not. Oleg Salenki (?) scored more WC goals in 1 match than 99% of players will in their lives, but he’s not considered.

I get what you mean in general though, but I still don’t think that players live for the WC like they used to.

Winning a world cup with brazil is nothing special in the grand scheme of goats.

Even kleberson is a world cup winner.

World cup is overrated, sure you need to be special to win it but you could also fluke a win here and there.

It's at the end of the day just a few match in 4 years. And early world cup is more like an exhibition with only several strong team unlike the world cup of today where everyone is decked with players playing in high level european football.

 

[Lay]

Winning a world cup with brazil is nothing special in the grand scheme of goats.

Even kleberson is a world cup winner.

World cup is overrated, sure you need to be special to win it but you could also fluke a win here and there.

It's at the end of the day just a few match in 4 years. And early world cup is more like an exhibition with only several strong team unlike the world cup of today where everyone is decked with players playing in high level european football.

It would be over 20 years for Brazil to have not won it when the next one comes round. Would we downplay Neymar if he leads them to glory because it’s Brazil? What next, it’s not that special if Italy or Germany win it? Who are only 1 behind Brazils record.

Players legacies are greater due to the World Cup. Every potential GOAT has done it at the World Cup apart from Messi and Cristiano. Di Stefano too but I don’t know the full reasons for his lack of appearances.

It’s bizarre to downplay World Cup performances just because it might not be important as it once was to some people.

 

[Cal?]

5-6?

Cristiano Ronaldo & Messi are by some distance the best 2 players in human history.

 

[bsCallout]

Messi and Ronaldo are levels above anyone in history. It's the same in all sports.

That's not to say X couldn't have been as good as them with everything players have now but Messi and Ronaldo are the best of the best pros.

Maradonna and Pele were the best of a bunch of part time footballers.

 

[Adisa]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This picture just shows the phenomenon that is Cristiano.
The man has been playing at the very highest level since fecking Edgar Davids was kicking a ball.

 

[Champagne Football]

Messi, Cristiano and Pele are the only 3 players who can be seriously talked about as GOATs.

Maradonna was not professional enough to be in the conversation. People say 'But he won Serie A on his own with Napoli'... Yeah but Mahrez and Kante won the PL on their own with Leicester too and they are not GOATs.

Robaldinho and Ronaldo phenomenon didn't do it consistently enough to be in the conversation. Cryuff wasn't at the level of Cristiano and Messi.

 

[R77]

It's a bit like trying to rank bands or guitarists, or painters. Doesn't really work, but makes for a discussion. There's a pool of fairly obvious names, some of them were/are truly out of this world, others are just as much there because of when they did their thing. Some kind of absolute numerical ranking will never really exist, it's impossible because of the variables involved. The way things evolve over time, flash, flair vs machine-like precision, etc...

Cristiano is quite obviously in the top tier of all time greats.

 

[Sky1981]

It would be over 20 years for Brazil to have not won it when the next one comes round. Would we downplay Neymar if he leads them to glory because it’s Brazil? What next, it’s not that special if Italy or Germany win it? Who are only 1 behind Brazils record.

Players legacies are greater due to the World Cup. Every potential GOAT has done it at the World Cup apart from Messi and Cristiano. Di Stefano too but I don’t know the full reasons for his lack of appearances.

It’s bizarre to downplay World Cup performances just because it might not be important as it once was to some people.

We're not talking about 1 wc vs 1 cl. We're talking about multiple cl, tons of goals, and decades of being the best in the business.

At one point you gotta say that worth more than 7 games played every 4 years.

And many players won it with Brazil, or Italy, or germany. No big deal.

Mueller and klose won it, so does kleberson. R9 wasnt alone in that team. He has practically the best team in the tournament. He just happened to score the goals. Dont get me wrong, he good but to diminished cr7 because of wc?

 

[United Junkie]

Some people just hate ronaldo and would paint him lower no matter what he did.

The fact that he can go 5 - 6 toe to toe with messi is a testament of how good he is.

How could United fans hate him? If United fans hate him then they don't deserve being called a United fan.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Messi, Cristiano and Pele are the only 3 players who can be seriously talked about as GOATs.

Maradonna was not professional enough to be in the conversation. People say 'But he won Serie A on his own with Napoli'... Yeah but Mahrez and Kante won the PL on their own with Leicester too and they are not GOATs.

Robaldinho and Ronaldo phenomenon didn't do it consistently enough to be in the conversation. Cryuff wasn't at the level of Cristiano and Messi.

The ignorance in this post is quite astonishing. Congratulations

 

[Champagne Football]

The ignorance in this post is quite astonishing. Congratulations

The idiocy of your reply is bewildering. We'll agree to disagree. I think a lot of people would agree with me. Diego Simeone played with both Messi and Diego and said something along the lines of 'Let's not kid ourselves here, Messi is on another level to Diego'

I'd take Simeone's view any day over someone who's probably just watched the recent maradona movie, and is forming a GOAT opinion on the 2 minutes of Diego footballing clips in that.

 

[Lay]

We're not talking about 1 wc vs 1 cl. We're talking about multiple cl, tons of goals, and decades of being the best in the business.

At one point you gotta say that worth more than 7 games played every 4 years.

And many players won it with Brazil, or Italy, or germany. No big deal.

Mueller and klose won it, so does kleberson. R9 wasnt alone in that team. He has practically the best team in the tournament. He just happened to score the goals. Dont get me wrong, he good but to diminished cr7 because of wc?

The Kleberson comment is strange. Djimi Traore has a UCL medal, Daniel Sturridge has two! R9 didn't win it alone, but was he on the best team? In hindsight maybe but it was a Brazil team that wasn't considered a frontrunner as they almost didn't qualify without Ronaldo. They had to go to the last game to win.

I find it strange that players are being diminished for their WC performances, Pele's accomplishments get criticised, someone said in another thread that Maradona had average stats, someone said R9 was a tap in merchant who could be easily replaced in that 02 team. Its bonkers how much Messi and CR7 fans downplay things the other greats have done. CR7 and Messi have failed at World Cups. Why should that get a pass and not R9 failing to win the UCL?

 

[totaalvoetbal]

There are 5 kings of football. Alfredo Di Stefano, Pele, Johan Cruijff, Franz Beckenbauer and Diego Armando Maradona. Players can join the table, but no one can have a higher table.

 

[Inter Yer Nan]

It would be over 20 years for Brazil to have not won it when the next one comes round. Would we downplay Neymar if he leads them to glory because it’s Brazil? What next, it’s not that special if Italy or Germany win it? Who are only 1 behind Brazils record.

Players legacies are greater due to the World Cup. Every potential GOAT has done it at the World Cup apart from Messi and Cristiano. Di Stefano too but I don’t know the full reasons for his lack of appearances.

It’s bizarre to downplay World Cup performances just because it might not be important as it once was to some people.

I agree. Yeah, it's like if we suddenly started to discount the significance of the heavyweight world title from the 50's, 60's, 70's etc; World Cup is HUGE for legacy. Pele being the absolute best player in 1958, and best player AND leader in 1970 is huge. Sandwiched in between all of that is the insane consistency, performances, goal records etc; etc; etc; I'm not one to discount Messi and Ronaldo for lack of World Cup wins, but I do find it a bit tedious that some folks tend to downplay the World Cup to suit their agendas. That's the danger of when people become as big a fan of an individual player than of a team.

 

[Inter Yer Nan]

But I do consider Ronaldo a top five or six all-timer. I think it's hard to make a case against him quite frankly. But I am also conscious that it's hard to measure era's, and I measure relative to era's in many cases. Imagine if Pele had todays surfaces, todays balls (tee-hee), today's nutrition, coaching etc;

 

[wolvored]

Id have him joint 2nd only to Maradona. Him and Messi have won more balon d,or (European player of the year World footballof the year and all its other names it has been). They have scored more goals than anyone else. Peles total is dubious as no official data on a lot of what he claimed.

 

[gibers]

There are 5 kings of football. Alfredo Di Stefano, Pele, Johan Cruijff, Franz Beckenbauer and Diego Armando Maradona. Players can join the table, but no one can have a higher table.

So who else would you say is on that "table"?

 

[Maluco]

It’s crazy how much disrespect Cristiano Ronaldo gets, especially in a Manchester United forum.

He has surpassed all of those attackers in terms of goals and longevity. I get it, there is a nostalgia and a magic about some of these players and the older footage.

The fact is though, that Messi and Ronaldo are smashing it consistently for over 15 years now. Insane levels of consistency and performance. That consistency seems to have made them boring for those that long for the past, but it’s that very consistency which separates them from the rest, in my opinion.

Ronaldo’s style isn’t as aesthetically pleasing, but there simply hasn’t been a more effective and efficient footballer in the history of the game.

They are very easily at the top table and those seriously putting him below Johan Cruyff and denying him access to the conversation are letting their preferences for aesthetics get in the way.

He is one of the very best of all time and we should be so proud to have witnessed his development and ascension to the top of the game at our club.

 

[NasirTimothy]

It would be over 20 years for Brazil to have not won it when the next one comes round. Would we downplay Neymar if he leads them to glory because it’s Brazil? What next, it’s not that special if Italy or Germany win it? Who are only 1 behind Brazils record.

Players legacies are greater due to the World Cup. Every potential GOAT has done it at the World Cup apart from Messi and Cristiano. Di Stefano too but I don’t know the full reasons for his lack of appearances.

It’s bizarre to downplay World Cup performances just because it might not be important as it once was to some people.

Combination of bad luck and circumstances. DiStefano played for 3 countries. When he was a kid and a star at River Plate, he played for Argentina and won the Copa America (or the South American championship as it was then called) in 1947. 6 goals in 6 appearances, but they were the only games he played for them. Obviously there were no World Cups between 1938 and 1950 because of the war. Argentina withdrew from qualifying for the 1950 World Cup because of player strikes and a dispute with the Brazilian FA (this type of stuff happened all the time back then, with countries refusing to participate in tournaments because of one beef or another)

Then he went to play for Millonarios in Colombia and sneakily turned out for their national team for a few games. This led to him being banned from playing for Argentina, so he wasn’t able to take part in the qualification for the 54 WC (which Argentina didn’t get to anyway)

Then he moved to Spain and played international football with them (after getting Spanish citizenship) and did well and scored quite a few goals. They failed to qualify for the 1958 WC even though they had some truly great players.

His last chance was in 62 with Spain. They qualified, but ADS got injured and couldn’t play. Interestingly, Didi, one of the greatest midfielders of all time and the mastermind of the great Brazil side really wanted to face ADS in the Spain team (they were drawn in the same group). Didi was at Real Madrid very briefly in the 50s and the story goes that ADS was threatened by him and so froze him out of the team, wouldn’t pass to him etc. He had to go back to Brazil with his tail between his legs. ADS ran that team like a Godfather. Didi wanted revenge in the WC but ADS got injured so he wasn’t able to face him. But Brazil did go on to win the trophy so I guess he was pretty happy with that.

 

[lysglimt]

I would rate both Messi and Ronaldo above Maradona. Not because I feel that they were better when they were at the top, but because they were at the top so much longer than Maradona. Maradona only really played at the highest level for 9 seasons, and because Maradonas contribution to Argentina apart from 3 seasons in the mid-80s really wasn't that great. Yes he was unbelievable from 85 to 87 but apart from those 3 seasons, he only scored a total of 17 more goals for Argentina. Ronaldo in comparison has over 100 goals for Portugal, that's 3 times more than Maradona

 

[Dansk]

Football has changed so much over the years that it seems silly to compare players from the distant past to anyone today. I have a strong suspicion that if Messi and Ronaldo travelled back in time and played in the 50s or 60s, they would be so far ahead of everyone else that it would completely turn the sport on its head. There's also a good chance that the likes of Pele and Maradona wouldn't be the worldbeaters that they were in their time if inserted into today's game.

Tactics, training methods and especially defense philosophy has advanced unfathomably, and we see plenty of players today who are profoundly gifted but can't put up with certain aspects of the game that take place outside of those 90 minutes on the pitch. Being the best in an era where it was completely ordinary for players to drink and smoke to their hearts' content, and where defense ranged from comically inept to plainly violent, does not mean they would be anywhere near the best in today's ultra-refined game. I suspect it would be a lot like taking leading scientists from 1950 and dropping them off in a modern research facility.

I think Messi and Ronaldo are the best there have ever been. Of course, if we judge players based on the standards of their time, it's different--but then things become too abstract. Twenty years from now, the game will have become even more refined and the best players then will be better than Messi and Ronaldo. For my part, I think the two are equal, it's just that Ronaldo's playstyle is less flashy. People are in love with dribbling and fancy footwork, and not as impressed by the sight of sheer athleticism. Messi has also played amongst a higher caliber of players throughout most of his career, both at club and international level. I don't think one's better than the other, and I certainly don't agree with those who claim that Messi is decidedly superior.

 

[Krakenzero]

There are 5 kings of football. Alfredo Di Stefano, Pele, Johan Cruijff, Franz Beckenbauer and Diego Armando Maradona. Players can join the table, but no one can have a higher table.

Esentially this. I find it amusing that the people believing Cristiano Ronaldo or Messi to be the GOATs compare them to players that have won the WC and not to the likes of Di Stéfano or Gento, then demerit the WC in favour of the UCL.