Would Ronaldo have been so adored if he played football in this current era

[Blood Mage]

Would have been an even bigger star due to superior nutrition and sports science.

 

[united_99]

Exactly. We had it to a degree in England with us being richer than everybody else and able to buy the best domestically but it never extended to the continent. Italy which was the best league in the '90s had teams like Fiorentina boasting players like Batistuta, the second all time goalscorer in Argentina. Roberto Baggio played for Milan, Juventus, Inter, Bologna and Brescia. Crespo played for Parma and Lazio. It just was not setup for the dominance we see today.

We weren’t top spenders in England in the 90s.
There were great players at other teams like Shearer, Gazza as well as at Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, etc.
Same in other leagues, while there were great players at other clubs, more of them were at Real, Barca, Juve, Inter, Milan, Bayern, etc. Serie A was more competitive as there were more top teams such as Lazio.
But yeah it was much harder to score goals back then, especially in Serie A. Ronaldo would have been among the goats in any era.

 

[Theonas]

Sorry but he'd always be a distant third to them. No one will replicate what Messi and Ronaldo did in many, many years to come.

In the age of social media and opinions including people from all over the world, CR would still be at the top, I'd reckon. A big part of his appeal is his personality and mentality. A lot of people who are not passionate football fans but entranced with the celebrity culture do like CR's persona. He represents the macho, "winner" mindset that has become so trendy over the past 10 years so. Ronaldo's persona was closer to Ronaldinho's. They came across very casual and playful. Among footballers, they are held as legends but for the casual fan, the hard facts don't back them up as much. I guess what I am trying to say is that social media created a much more emphasis on the overall persona of the stars of today. There is a narrative that is being pushed being actively encouraged to have a 50/50 split to get more discussion and traffic among followers.

 

[NotoriousISSY]

Would have been an even bigger star due to superior nutrition and sports science.

Or an even 'bigger' star because UberEats makes food really accessible, especially if you're rich as feck

 

[Theonas]

We weren’t top spenders in England in the 90s.
There were great players at other teams like Shearer, Gazza as well as at Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, etc.
Same in other leagues, while there were great players at other clubs, more of them were at Real, Barca, Juve, Inter, Milan, Bayern, etc. Serie A was more competitive as there were more top teams such as Lazio.
But yeah it was much harder to score goals back then, especially in Serie A. Ronaldo would have been among the goats in any era.

We did however have a financial advantage over everybody else in England. We could casually buy the league's best players as we could pay significantly more. We didn't get everyone we wanted of course but when you look at how many times we broke the transfer's record at the time compared to our rivals, there was no competition. It's one of the reasons the PL in the '90s was the weaker league among Europe's elite. That and just not being able to compete with Spain and Italy for the cream of European talents like the Zidanes, Ronaldos and Rivaldos,...

 

[Joel Miller]

The stats brigade are tiresome. I’m certain they don’t actually watch games just go on Wikipedia

It’s absolutely tedious the way football fans sub 30 seem to have whittled the entire sport down to an exercise in reading numbers off Wikipedia or some other stat website. Football isn’t baseball, and often numbers aren’t much use without any context (never won a CL - Also never competed in the competition in his prime!). The two eras were completely different, but Ronaldo had the nickname phenomenon for a reason. He had a level of ability that was jaw dropping and he did some really remarkable things in his early years.

Injuries obviously hindered him signficantly in the end, but he was still able to demonstrate that he was a truly special player and was still able to produce a career defining World Cup, as well as some extraordinary showings in Serie A when it was famed for being the best league in the world, and notoriously difficult for attackers due to the quality of defending there. I often feel people are forever attempting to talk down Ronaldo because he was more gifted than Cristiano and people too young to have seen him can’t comprehend how someone without the longevity of Cristiano gets all this adulation. But he gets that adulation for a reason.

 

[harms]

Ronaldo would’ve been tapped up and bought by whoever was the biggest superpower straight from PSV in the current era, ergo untouchable and untransferable. Whatever superpower that was would be assured of amassing a stupid amount of domestic trophies thanks to the financial imbalance. Playing in the best squad and also being Ronaldo, he would be more dominant, more revered and more regarded now than he was back then. There would be zero club-hopping unless the player wanted it; he definitely wouldn’t play for so many clubs in this era.

Any numbers anyone else is putting up would also be shattered by an injury-free Ronaldo.

This.

This hypothetical seems poorly thought through. Does he play in the current era? If so, this changes his career dramatically, perhaps even allowing him to escape his injuries and elevating him closer to the GOAT status. Or does his goals and trophy haul get transferred to this era but the conditions stays as they were in the 90's? I'm not sure how this is supposed to work but he does use his lack of domestic trophies as an argument.

 

[united_99]

We did however have a financial advantage over everybody else in England. We could casually buy the league's best players as we could pay significantly more. We didn't get everyone we wanted of course but when you look at how many times we broke the transfer's record at the time compared to our rivals, there was no competition. It's one of the reasons the PL in the '90s was the weaker league among Europe's elite. That and just not being able to compete with Spain and Italy for the cream of European talents like the Zidanes, Ronaldos and Rivaldos,...

We did break transfer records from time to time but still weren’t top spenders in the 90s. We were 4th big spenders in England I believe. We also didn’t use our financial advantage to offer top wages either. Other English clubs were paying their top players more than we were paying ours‘ until Keane fought with the board for it AFTER winning several league titles and a treble. That’s when more and more of our players got competitive wages (at least in England, in Europe we were still paying less than other top European clubs).

 

[kouroux]

Except he didn't improve his teams results, Barca won the league the season after he left but finished 2nd the season he was there, he joined real Madrid who'd won 2 champions leagues in the 3 seasons before he joined and they never even got to another final while he was there, so if we're not judging by goals scored, or impact on his teams results, then what? Ability to dribble well?

There is so much more to football than "improving his team's results", a player alone cannot do that if the team he is playing for has many issues.
As far as I'm concerned, I was lucky enough to watch him during his prime and there has never been a striker who has been as good as and as breathtaking as him, I sigh when I think at the type of player he could have become with more experience if his fitness never failed him.
The kinda player he still became after 2 serious knee injuries is truly a marvel to me. The improvement in science and health would have also meant that in spite of, he could have become even better than what he was post injury

 

[11101]

He'd be the best and most famous player in the world. He was undoubtedly superior to both Messi and Cristiano as youngsters, let alone Mbappe and Haaland, so he would have been the one Barcelona or Madrid made into their star. Who knows how Messi or Cristiano would have developed from there. He was the best player in the world by a country mile at 20 years old, and scored a goal a game at a time when people didn't score a goal a game. All that is assuming that modern sports science, pitch quality, and attitude to defending means his knees held up.

Transport him directly to 2023, dodgy knees and all, and he would be seen just as he is now. Potential to be the best player who ever lived, arguably was the best who ever lived for about 2 years, before a chronic knee injury made him a lifelong what if.

 

[kouroux]

While that's technically true, I don't know if including a world cup where he played 0 minutes among his trophy haul does anything to prove his greatness

It proves that at 17 years old, he was deemed good enough to be selected in the brazilian national team. That's some feat in itself

 

[Pintu]

These threads always show how incapable some are of understanding the differences between eras.

• 'Never won the Champions League' - he never played in the Champions League at the peak of his powers.
• 'Who cares about his record in the Cup Winners Cup / UEFA Cup' - the EC/CL was always number one, but there really wasn't a big difference between the 3 competitions at the time. The gulf opened up from the 2000s onward when 4 teams from the big countries entered. Prior to that, there was often better depth in the other European competitions. For example, you don't get a battle today like you did in the 1998 ECWC Final between arguably the greatest all-round centre-forward and the greatest all-round centre-back of all time. The only place for such a clash today would be the final stages of the Champions League.
• 'Don't count his time at PSV as relevant' - There was no major gulf between the various leagues at the time, this opened up as resources were swallowed up by the big leagues in the last two decades. Ronaldo joined a Dutch league which had the best team in the world in Ajax, who won the CL that year, had won the UEFA Cup a couple of years earlier, and where PSV had also won the European Cup a couple of years prior to that. His performances there as a 17-19 year-old are very much part of the conversation of his peak level.

One of the only things that has stayed fairly constant over the last 25 years have been major international competitions (not including the expansion of the Euros and the qualification system). Ronaldo's awesome record there in 97, 98, 99 and 02 shows how well he compares when we are looking at like-for-like, and also show how devastating he would have been with an elite, expensively resourced and expertly managed club side behind him.

Great post… But the final you talk about between Inter and Lazio (Ronaldo vs Nesta) was in the UEFA Cup, not the CWC. He won it of course. 3-0…

He also won the CWC a year prior to that with Barcelona, scoring in the final against PSG (1-0).

 

[Theonas]

We did break transfer records from time to time but still weren’t top spenders in the 90s. We were 4th big spenders in England I believe. We also didn’t use our financial advantage to offer top wages either. Other English clubs were paying their top players more than we were paying ours‘ until Keane fought with the board for it AFTER winning several league titles and a treble. That’s when more and more of our players got competitive wages (at least in England, in Europe we were still paying less than other top European clubs).

You are right in that we weren't paying our star players parity with the star players of other clubs. Alan Shearer, Denis Bergkamp and Fabrizio Ravanelli had higher wages than our players in the '90s. But our overall wage bill was the highest in the PL. Our total spend might have been less as we had that golden 1992 generation but we did have dibs over the best national talent. It was a shock that Shearer turned us down as the common wisdom back then is you end up at Manchester United if you are elite in England.

 

[kouroux]

These threads always show how incapable some are of understanding the differences between eras.

• 'Never won the Champions League' - he never played in the Champions League at the peak of his powers.
• 'Who cares about his record in the Cup Winners Cup / UEFA Cup' - the EC/CL was always number one, but there really wasn't a big difference between the 3 competitions at the time. The gulf opened up from the 2000s onward when 4 teams from the big countries entered. Prior to that, there was often better depth in the other European competitions. For example, you don't get a battle today like you did in the 1998 ECWC Final between arguably the greatest all-round centre-forward and the greatest all-round centre-back of all time. The only place for such a clash today would be the final stages of the Champions League.
• 'Don't count his time at PSV as relevant' - There was no major gulf between the various leagues at the time, this opened up as resources were swallowed up by the big leagues in the last two decades. Ronaldo joined a Dutch league which had the best team in the world in Ajax, who won the CL that year, had won the UEFA Cup a couple of years earlier, and where PSV had also won the European Cup a couple of years prior to that. His performances there as a 17-19 year-old are very much part of the conversation of his peak level.

One of the only things that has stayed fairly constant over the last 25 years have been major international competitions (not including the expansion of the Euros and the qualification system). Ronaldo's awesome record there in 97, 98, 99 and 02 shows how well he compares when we are looking at like-for-like, and also show how devastating he would have been with an elite, expensively resourced and expertly managed club side behind him.

Amen, great post. These debates truly show who is open minded about it and who is the opposite

 

[Malkovich]

In Ronaldo's era there weren't any super teams, let alone the ones he was playing in.

Ronaldo in a super team context (Brazil NT) he won everything, top scorer of wc, copa america, carrying to a finals in 1998, you name it.
If he was put into a team equivalent of the Brazil NT you would imagine his trophy haul was different.

You look at those first Inter starting XIs and even Barcelona, its a complete joke compared to what Messi and CR had throughout their primes.
Guys like Moriero, Ze Elias, Taribo West, Sartor, Galante were starters.. even his "2nd stars" were guys like Djorkaeff not a Suarez or a Neymar or a Modric Benzema etc. Please, for the stats guys, let's contextualize a bit..

 

[united_99]

You are right in that we weren't paying our star players parity with the star players of other clubs. Alan Shearer, Denis Bergkamp and Fabrizio Ravanelli had higher wages than our players in the '90s. But our overall wage bill was the highest in the PL. Our total spend might have been less as we had that golden 1992 generation but we did have dibs over the best national talent. It was a shock that Shearer turned us down as the common wisdom back then is you end up at Manchester United if you are elite in England.

Yeah Shearer turned us down twice and I am still a bit bitter. Don’t like him. He won almost nothing and we won everything and if he had come we may not even have witnessed the great different strikers (and partnerships) we have had, and here I am still holding a grudge. His loss!

 

[shamans]

In the age of social media and opinions including people from all over the world, CR would still be at the top, I'd reckon. A big part of his appeal is his personality and mentality. A lot of people who are not passionate football fans but entranced with the celebrity culture do like CR's persona. He represents the macho, "winner" mindset that has become so trendy over the past 10 years so. Ronaldo's persona was closer to Ronaldinho's. They came across very casual and playful. Among footballers, they are held as legends but for the casual fan, the hard facts don't back them up as much. I guess what I am trying to say is that social media created a much more emphasis on the overall persona of the stars of today. There is a narrative that is being pushed being actively encouraged to have a 50/50 split to get more discussion and traffic among followers.

I think the social media age really, really scrutinizes players to extreme detail. The fact that despite all this scrutiny Messi and Ronaldo had incredible games week after week at their peak says it all to me. Ronaldhinho was in the pre social media era and I don't wanna take away what he did -- no footballer did what Ronaldinho did -- but lets face it he had a lot of terrible games as well and in the modern era maybe he wouldn't have been so highly rated.

If you're as iconic as Ronaldo you stand out in every era, as good as Mbappe is he isn't as electrifying as R9 was.

There hasn't been a player really comparable to him since he came about, only players who have parts of their game similar to his because they modeled their game on him, i.e Benzema.

Time have changed. We had limited mediums before and everyone knew who Ronaldo was. His face was just iconic wherever you saw it. It's the same with the entertainment industry. There won't be another Micheal Jackson or another Hulk Hogan. That's why I think if you transposed Ronaldos' career to today he would be iconic, but not to the level he was.

Think of someone like David Beckham. Do you think he could become an icon he was in today's game? I really rate Beckham as one of the greats but times have changed.

 

[Theonas]

Yeah Shearer turned us down twice and I am still a bit bitter. Don’t like him. He won almost nothing and we won everything and if he had come we may not even have witnessed the great different strikers (and partnerships) we have had, and here I am still holding a grudge. His loss!

He was before my time but I'd have chosen Gascoigne over Shearer. I just always preferred silky creative players over mechanical and efficient ones. It also helps that we didn't struggle too much after he turned us down I guess

 

[jm99]

There's a reason a lot of the older fans despise anyone using stats to back up their argument, because it doesn't go along with the "things were better in my day" narrative that they have in their head. Most will have watched Ronaldo through highlights, or occasionally getting to see him live, if you watched Messi or Ronaldo only through highlights they'd look even more like aliens than they already do. Brazilian Ronaldo never got the kind of scrutiny these two get, I mean look at the people in the Ronaldo talking about how his poor performances in Saudi damage his legacy, by the time he was 38, Brazilian Ronaldo was about 25 stone and had been retired for years, he just wasn't subject to the same scrutiny

 

[Theonas]

I think the social media age really, really scrutinizes players to extreme detail. The fact that despite all this scrutiny Messi and Ronaldo had incredible games week after week at their peak says it all to me. Ronaldhinho was in the pre social media era and I don't wanna take away what he did -- no footballer did what Ronaldinho did -- but lets face it he had a lot of terrible games as well and in the modern era maybe he wouldn't have been so highly rated.

I agree completely. But my assertion was more about that how they are viewed now extends to the casual fan as well and the casual fan needs a narrative and a persona, more than the actual football. It's like if I ask 10 people to vote who is better A or B and those 10 people are all football fans. The evaluation would be more on footballing mertis. If I ask a 100 people, naturally many of them would be less football inclined so the evaluation would include other traits, it would be more about what A and B represents. We live in an age where politics and social issues are everywhere. CR had a picture taken of him with Jordan Petersen, he is friends with Piers Morgan. Those people have a lot fans and they represent a mindset. Whereas I agree completely with what you say, I, also think that social media builds narratives and actively pushes contrasting narratives to generate more traffic. Hard working vs natural talent, team player vs individual, efficiency vs flair, quiet and down to earth vs confident. The result is people fit the compared parties to these narratives like a Marvel movie. CR's fame benefited from that as he represents a very trendy and prelavent world view in today's culture wars.

 

[Theonas]

There's a reason a lot of the older fans despise anyone using stats to back up their argument, because it doesn't go along with the "things were better in my day" narrative that they have in their head. Most will have watched Ronaldo through highlights, or occasionally getting to see him live, if you watched Messi or Ronaldo only through highlights they'd look even more like aliens than they already do. Brazilian Ronaldo never got the kind of scrutiny these two get, I mean look at the people in the Ronaldo talking about how his poor performances in Saudi damage his legacy, by the time he was 38, Brazilian Ronaldo was about 25 stone and had been retired for years, he just wasn't subject to the same scrutiny

The two don't have to be mutually exclusive though. I think that today's defenders have a much harder job to do than in the past and are therefore at least as good. I also think that the quality of football being played today is significantly higher. I also happen to think using stats to judge offensive players is absurd.

 

[Righteous Steps]

There's a reason a lot of the older fans despise anyone using stats to back up their argument, because it doesn't go along with the "things were better in my day" narrative that they have in their head. Most will have watched Ronaldo through highlights, or occasionally getting to see him live, if you watched Messi or Ronaldo only through highlights they'd look even more like aliens than they already do. Brazilian Ronaldo never got the kind of scrutiny these two get, I mean look at the people in the Ronaldo talking about how his poor performances in Saudi damage his legacy, by the time he was 38, Brazilian Ronaldo was about 25 stone and had been retired for years, he just wasn't subject to the same scrutiny

If stats were all that mattered the likes of Zidane and Maradona wouldn't be regarded as the best players of their time. In each season Zidane was considered the best there was always a player who was more productive, you can extend that to other attackers, even in PL history the likes of Bergkamp and Cantona were not the most productive forwards in each season they played. Stats is good when accompanied by reasoning and context, but its not the be all and end all, especially the stats you post which are Goals and Assists, at least when some people discuss stats especially in relation to the Cristiano vs Messi debates, they delve a bit deeper and quote things such as created chances, key passes, dribbles, passes per game, ball carries and so on.

Also Brazilian Ronaldo wasn't subjected to the same scrutiny because it was a near miracle he was playing at all past 27.

 

[youngrell]

There's a reason a lot of the older fans despise anyone using stats to back up their argument, because it doesn't go along with the "things were better in my day" narrative that they have in their head. Most will have watched Ronaldo through highlights, or occasionally getting to see him live, if you watched Messi or Ronaldo only through highlights they'd look even more like aliens than they already do. Brazilian Ronaldo never got the kind of scrutiny these two get, I mean look at the people in the Ronaldo talking about how his poor performances in Saudi damage his legacy, by the time he was 38, Brazilian Ronaldo was about 25 stone and had been retired for years, he just wasn't subject to the same scrutiny

Ronaldo's knee cap completely detached from his shinbone and exploded at age 24. It's a miracle he ever played again, nevermind to the level he did. Expecting him to play until 38 is ridiculous, particularly as barely any players from that era did, even without his injuries.

 

[jm99]

If stats were all that mattered the likes of Zidane and Maradona wouldn't be regarded as the best players of their time. In each season Zidane was considered the best there was always a player who was more productive, you can extend that to other attackers, even in PL history the likes of Bergkamp and Cantona were not the most productive forwards in each season they played. Stats is good when accompanied by reasoning and context, but its not the be all and end all, especially the stats you post which are Goals and Assists, at least when some people discuss stats especially in relation to the Cristiano vs Messi debates, they delve a bit deeper and quote things such as created chances, key passes, dribbles, passes per game, ball carries and so on.

Also Brazilian Ronaldo wasn't subjected to the same scrutiny because it was a near miracle he was playing at all past 27.

Didn't Maradona score 300 goals playing mostly a deeper role? Hardly a terrible return, and Zidane was criticised for being inconsistent a lot, though he would show up regularly in the big games. Neither of those players were strikers though, Ronaldo became so hyped because of his goalscoring, so it's not exactly fair to make the comparison to Zidane.

He wasn't subject to the same scrutiny because it wasn't as easy to watch football then, every game wasn't available in HD, most people's exposure was seeing grainy highlights, so of course he's going to look better than players who you can see every minute of every game

 

[jm99]

Ronaldo's knee cap completely detached from his shinbone and exploded at age 24. It's a miracle he ever played again, nevermind to the level he did. Expecting him to play until 38 is ridiculous, particularly as barely any players from that era did, even without his injuries.

I'm not expecting him to play til 38, my point is that Ronaldo is being criticised for his performances well past his peak in a retirement league, whereas Brazilian ronaldo's fans say yo judge him off his two best seasons and nothing else, champions league doesn't count because he had injury problems etc. He just wasn't subject to the kind of scrutiny Ronaldo and Messi get

 

[youngrell]

I'm not expecting him to play til 38, my point is that Ronaldo is being criticised for his performances well past his peak in a retirement league, whereas Brazilian ronaldo's fans say yo judge him off his two best seasons and nothing else, champions league doesn't count because he had injury problems etc. He just wasn't subject to the kind of scrutiny Ronaldo and Messi get

Because he didn't get to have the 10-15 years injury-free career they had. He wasn't just good for 2 years and then tailed off, he had one of the worst injuries in history of top level football.

 

[Theonas]

I'm not expecting him to play til 38, my point is that Ronaldo is being criticised for his performances well past his peak in a retirement league, whereas Brazilian ronaldo's fans say yo judge him off his two best seasons and nothing else, champions league doesn't count because he had injury problems etc. He just wasn't subject to the kind of scrutiny Ronaldo and Messi get

It's about criteria. A lot of football fans value the ability to shine in huge moments and defining games over consistency. The latter has merit but it can at times be a robotoc method of evaluation. Maradona, Ronaldo and Zidane are held in such high esteem because they produced an abundance of the former.

 

[jm99]

Because he didn't get to have the 10-15 years injury-free career they had. He wasn't just good for 2 years and then tailed off, he had one of the worst injuries in history of top level football.

But he still played a few more years, Ronaldo had a bad knee injury as well around 2014 and completely changed the way he played, but he's judged on his whole career, not just his two best seasons. Ronaldo might have ended up like many other Brazilians and just gained weight or spent more time partying, he might have burnt out early like Rooney or fabregas, it's ridiculous to just pick his two best seasons, which aren't as good as Ronaldo or messi's two best, and extrapolate a whole career over it

 

[jm99]

It's about criteria. A lot of football fans value the ability to shine in huge moments and defining games over consistency. The latter has merit but it can at times be a robotoc method of evaluation. Maradona, Ronaldo and Zidane are held in such high esteem because they produced an abundance of the former.

Did Ronaldo do that though? Sure he had good world cup games but they akiunt to 14 games for his whole career, and some of them were against Costa Rica and China etc. Compare that against two players who one of whom just won a world cup as the star man with a much weaker team around him than that Brazil side, is the all time top scorer in the clasico and has a very good finals record, and the other who's the all time top scorer in the champions league, with nearly 70 goals in the knockout stages and scored over 20 clasico goals. By any metric theyre still better players, apart from international football, and even then I'd say Messi winning with Argentina is probably better than Ronaldo winning with that Brazil side. He's been better than cristiano at an International level, but I'd wager if you put him in that 2002 Brazil side they win the world cup as well

 

[JPRouve]

Did Ronaldo do that though? Sure he had good world cup games but they akiunt to 14 games for his whole career, and some of them were against Costa Rica and China etc. Compare that against two players who one of whom just won a world cup as the star man with a much weaker team around him than that Brazil side, is the all time top scorer in the clasico and has a very good finals record, and the other who's the all time top scorer in the champions league, with nearly 70 goals in the knockout stages and scored over 20 clasico goals. By any metric theyre still better players, apart from international football, and even then I'd say Messi winning with Argentina is probably better than Ronaldo winning with that Brazil side. He's been better than cristiano at an International level, but I'd wager if you put him in that 2002 Brazil side they win the world cup as well

What has Cristiano Ronaldo got to do with this?

 

[jm99]

What has Cristiano Ronaldo got to do with this?

It's the entire discussion? I said that Ronaldo would suffer from playing at the same time as two players who were putting up better numbers for much longer and were largely outperforming him. The same way suarez, ibrahimovic, lewandowski etc. Are all rated much lower than they would have been had they played during the 90s or 2000s because there were two freaks putting them to shame

 

[youngrell]

But he still played a few more years, Ronaldo had a bad knee injury as well around 2014 and completely changed the way he played, but he's judged on his whole career, not just his two best seasons. Ronaldo might have ended up like many other Brazilians and just gained weight or spent more time partying, he might have burnt out early like Rooney or fabregas, it's ridiculous to just pick his two best seasons, which aren't as good as Ronaldo or messi's two best, and extrapolate a whole career over it

we are not talking about a bad knee injury here, we are talking one of the worst.

Anyway, the whole premise of the thread is a hypothetical question about Ronaldo playing in today's game, so yes I can speculate that he would have been able to maintain his level for many more years were it not for his knee. Afterall, he still managed some incredible feats despite his knee, so it is not a stretch at all to think this.

 

[JPRouve]

It's the entire discussion? I said that Ronaldo would suffer from playing at the same time as two players who were putting up better numbers for much longer and were largely outperforming him. The same way suarez, ibrahimovic, lewandowski etc. Are all rated much lower than they would have been had they played during the 90s or 2000s because there were two freaks putting them to shame

Suarez, Ibrahimovic and Lewandowski would be one of many and not at the top. They actually benefitted from the fact that they are from a different era to Ronaldo, Romario, Batistuta, Raul, Crespo, Vieri, Elber, Shearer, Zamorano, Suker, Milosevic, Henry, Shevchenko, Weah, Baggio, Vialli, Trezeguet and many others.

Let's be clear about something. The current era is the least competitive we have seen, not only there is less top talents but they are concentrated in the same few teams, they are teammates and are in a better position to stat pad for most of their careers.

 

[Theonas]

Did Ronaldo do that though? Sure he had good world cup games but they akiunt to 14 games for his whole career, and some of them were against Costa Rica and China etc. Compare that against two players who one of whom just won a world cup as the star man with a much weaker team around him than that Brazil side, is the all time top scorer in the clasico and has a very good finals record, and the other who's the all time top scorer in the champions league, with nearly 70 goals in the knockout stages and scored over 20 clasico goals. By any metric theyre still better players, apart from international football, and even then I'd say Messi winning with Argentina is probably better than Ronaldo winning with that Brazil side. He's been better than cristiano at an International level, but I'd wager if you put him in that 2002 Brazil side they win the world cup as well

In the case of Messi, I agree. No one is ahead of Messi in my view. Maybe Maradona and Pele are as good but no one is better as far as I am concerned. So we're in agreement there. But CR is lacking in that regard. Ronaldo scoring a brace in a WC final, his hatrick against us at OT, his performance vs Nesta against Lazio are displays that defined huge games. I recall CR producing great moments in big games but really not that many iconic displays where he was the only remaining memory. He lived off moments which is a strength, don't get me wrong, he could produce without much involvment and was a bonafide killer. I am not here using this to downplay what he achieved because what he achieved makes an all time great in his own right. I am only pointing why I think some players enjoy a more universal level of adoration and "warmth".

 

[jm99]

Suarez, Ibrahimovic and Lewandowski would be one of many and not at the top. They actually benefitted from the fact that they are from a different era to Ronaldo, Romario, Batistuta, Raul, Crespo, Vieri, Elber, Shearer, Zamorano, Suker, Milosevic, Henry, Shevchenko, Weah, Baggio, Vialli, Trezeguet and many others.

Let's be clear about something. The current era is the least competitive we have seen, not only there is less top talents but they are concentrated in the same few teams, they are teammates and are in a better position to stat pad for most of their careers.

I don't think this is true at all, it's just nostalgia making you see those players as better and refusing to accept modern players being better. for the last ten years youve had bayern, real, barca, juventus, psg as well as about 4 English teams all of which have been very strong sides and would blow away most teams from the 90s.

As I showed earlier the season Ronaldo was at Barca, there was the same difference in points between real and Barca and the rest as there was in 14/15 when cristiano scored 48 goals and MSN won a treble. People are just desperate to paint the football from when they were teenagers as better but it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny

 

[jm99]

In the case of Messi, I agree. No one is ahead of Messi in my view. Maybe Maradona and Pele are as good but no one is better as far as I am concerned. So we're in agreement there. But CR is lacking in that regard. Ronaldo scoring a brace in a WC final, his hatrick against us at OT, his performance vs Nesta against Lazio are displays that defined huge games. I recall CR producing great moments in big games but really not that many iconic displays where he was the only remaining memory. He lived off moments which is a strength, don't get me wrong, he could produce without much involvment and was a bonafide killer. I am not here using this to downplay what he achieved because what he achieved makes an all time great in his own right. I am only pointing why I think some players enjoy a more universal level of adoration and "warmth".

Well there was the time he scored back to back hat tricks against atletico and bayern plus another 2 goals against bayern and 2 in the final against juventus for 10 goals in 5 games against 3 of the best sides in the world to win a Champions league. Which I think beats a hat trick against us at old Trafford with barthez in nets. I mean the guy has scored 41 goals from the quarter finals onwards in the champions league, Messi's second with 20 or something, it's a ridiculous amount of big game performances

 

[JPRouve]

I don't think this is true at all, it's just nostalgia making you see those players as better and refusing to accept modern players being better. for the last ten years youve had bayern, real, barca, juventus, psg as well as about 4 English teams all of which have been very strong sides and would blow away most teams from the 90s.

As I showed earlier the season Ronaldo was at Barca, there was the same difference in points between real and Barca and the rest as there was in 14/15 when cristiano scored 48 goals and MSN won a treble. People are just desperate to paint the football from when they were teenagers as better but it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny

You think that it's nostalgia that makes me think that Lewandowski, Suarez and Ibrahimovic would be one of many in the 90s and 20s? Even though they would literally be one of many.

 

[jm99]

The answer to this question is evidenced in this thread by posters like jm99, unfortunately (imo). Would R9 be less adored if he played in this current era? Demonstrably yes, but that's a reflection on how the modern day sports fan has changed more than it is on Ronaldo as a player.

And it has nothing to do with the fact that his worse games would be available to see and not just a highlight reel, or that he isn't being viewed through nostalgia tinted specs, it's all the fans fault?

 

[united_99]

So is this a „disguised“ thread to celebrate Cristiano‘s numbers (because no one has been doing it recently) at the expense of the original Ronaldo?
Original Ronaldo is now being compared to Ibra and Lewa. Bloody hell.
I will give it a few pages and he may be compared to WW.
I can assure everyone that a genius player who not only came back from serious injuries but also overcame the shock/disappointing of WC98 to perform and win the next WC would have been mentally strong enough to also cope in today’s apparently incredibly difficult and demanding world where players have support for everything (most are so dumb that they probably won’t even find the toilet or bedroom without someone helping them out).

 

[jm99]

You think that it's nostalgia that makes me think that Lewandowski, Suarez and Ibrahimovic would be one of many in the 90s and 20s? Even though they would literally be one of many.

They've managed over a goal a game, with suarez and ibrahimovic particularly adding more than just goals, they'd be as good as any striker in the 90s. Maybe about on par with peak Ronaldo, but suarez was ridiculously talented in particular as much of a cnut as he was. I think if you think he wouldn't be one of the top 5 players in the world at any point during the 90s yes, your nostalgia is clouding things