Di Stefano, along with Duncan Edwards are the two players I went out of my way to find as much available footage and information about when trying to learn about all the greats of the game. The reason being is that from the 60's onward footage is relatively vast for the generation of players that followed them.
With the aforementioned two, you have to take the word of those who saw them, the reports and articles and then make your own evaluation/interpretation of the information. It's easier to do this with Di Stefano than Edwards because there's more footage of him and a much larger body of work.
Anyway, aside from the pure, unadulterated facts of his goal ratios and trophies won, it is quickly gleaned via multiple sources that the definition of completeness referred to with Di Stefano outstrips any other player who has played the game. The biggest reason for that is that Di Stefano worked equally well in all facets on either side of the ball, be it attacking or defending, to a degree. I have no evidence that Di Stefano could actually have played as an actual defender and be world class in that area of the pitch, but anywhere else through the centre of the pitch, Di Stefano could have made himself an all-timer exclusively in one lone position. So that's as a pure: defensive midfielder; box-to-box midfielder; attacking midfielder; support striker or striker. To actually comprehend that, it means in a discussion about pure strikers, Di Stefano would be in the conversation as the best amongst the likes of Muller, Van Basten, Eusebio, Ronaldo, Puskas and so on. In a discussion about support strikers, he would be in the conversation about being the best in the company of: Pele, Cruyff, Messi*, Schiaffino and so on. In a discussion about attacking midfielders, he would be in the conversation about being the best in the company of: Maradona, Platini, Zico, Gullit, Charlton*, Didi and so on and so forth. In a discussion about box-to-box midfielders, he would be in the conversation about being the best in the company of: Matthaus, Neeskens, Falcao, Keane and so on. In a discussion about holding midfielders, he would be in the conversation about being the best in the company of: Bozsik, Rijkaard, Edwards, Andrade, Ocwirk, Redondo and so on.
Basically, it matters not which bunch of players you want to throw into the positions as his competition; he would be par and absolutely worthy of discussion as a direct peer to these specialist players in their, well, speciality. So then, when we consider that he can be compared and contrasted to so many stellar names, and even that is not enough, it should become pretty clear why he is so exalted and how he is elevated clearly over all but a literal handful of players, absolutely. Those that have really taken the time out to study the history of the game and considered all of the aforementioned players (and hundreds more) start to piece together that this guy must've been an extraordinary and unique player.
There's a famous get together between Cruyff and Beckenbauer talking about the history of the game and great players. I read it a long time ago as an excerpt on another forum and someone like
@Balu probably has, or knows of it. In their conversation, these two great players come to a unanimous agreement that they both modelled their games on Di Stefano and that he was unquestionably the most masterful and complete player they had ever seen. I hope someone does post the article as it isn't often you will see those two lauding a player to the heavens like they did with Di Stefano. There's a somewhat faux praise that players throw out about others, when asked, I feel, but to bring Di Stefano into their own discussion, unprompted and then praise him as they did, it really cemented all the information I had gathered about the Argentine to that point in time. As others have said in this thread, Law and Charlton did the same, but not to the same extent. I know there's a number of quotes from Maradona about Di Stefano's ability to mesh a team outstripping his own, too. I don't believe it was false humility, and in terms of the greatest nucleus the game has seen, I firmly believe Di Stefano is the #1 guy over even Maradona, Keane, Varela, Cruyff, Platini, Beckenbauer etc. in their pomp leading their teams to glory, in terms of his charisma, force of nature and ability to elevate others, and once again, this is not to denigrate others to elevate Di Stefano, but rather it's an effort to convey his presence and influence all over the pitch.
Another key difference with Di Stefano is that all of the others mentioned above 'came alive' in their key area of the pitch, the margins for each of them are huge, such was their ability, but they all relied on others doing their bit, before (the ball has to get to Maradona, Cruyff or Platini via the work of those behind them) or after (Varela, Keane or Beckenbauer worked from deeper before bringing others in or playing others in) whereas, as stated numerous times, Di Stefano would be the retriever, instigator, creator and/or goal-scorer as and when required. That means throughout his career he was renowned for being all of these things in one player - it wasn't some once in a blue moon occurrence; it was Di Stefano. I don't know of any other player that can be said about, not with the frequency it is stated for Di Stefano.
From the footage, and Di Stefano's own words, he admits he wasn't the greatest at any particular aspect of the game. He said he wasn't the greatest passer, shooter, dribbler or the fastest player but that he was quicker in the mind than others and could do everything he needed to to the standard he needed to play his game, and I think that is evidenced when you watch him. The first few times I saw him play, I was surprised at how little flash there was to his game. It's like watching somebody do everything a coach would want them to do to the highest degree possible. His fundamentals and execution combined with his intrinsic wit and endless stamina make it very clear, very quickly that this guy can outwork and combine with others as many times as required in 90 minutes. That's a very telling pressure to exert on the opposition, and the mental fatigue from being drilled and drilled over and over as your own stamina starts to drop and your tactical schematic gets stretched and falls into disarray is intimidating by itself. For his own team, it must've been so much easier to play their own game knowing there was a cog that would never stop turning constantly giving and taking the ball to them and opening up holes all over the pitch for them to exploit.
Even if you think of someone like Gento flying down the wing, how much must it have invigorated him to know he would always have his captain charging into open space ready and willing to receive the ball and make good use of it? For the older version of Puskas, he knew he just had to put himself into a good position and Di Stefano would do all the pre-requisite work to play him in or work with and off him. You can go through the whole team and Di Stefano's influence has the same knock-on effect. It must have been a magical time to be a fan of that club and I think it's obvious why Di Stefano's legend spread so far and wide after people all over Europe saw this dynamo playing the game in such a... complete.. and awe-inspiring manner before their very eyes. I also think what Di Stefano brought to the table is more of a once in a lifetime thing than other all-time greats whose plays and style can be directly compared and contrasted with one another endlessly to the finest micro detail. You can go through the annuls of the game and find hundreds of magical dribblers and/or passers or shot specialists, or what have you, but go ahead and find multiple players with Di Stefano's traits and characteristics and you will find the well runs dry very, very quickly.
The last thing I want to add is that I believe ranking and categorising others with Di Stefano, you have to separate categories. In terms of his style of completeness, he is in a company of one, but in the more general definition of what completeness is (left, right, head and being able to do everything required in a specialist position) there are others that best him. He wasn't a magician on the ball; he couldn't pass like the greatest passers; he couldn't dribble like the greatest dribblers, so if you were to look at him in that kind of cold, clinical fashion, he mightn't rank even top 20. But I think Di Stefano is the epitome of how footballers are the sum of parts working in harmony and proof that the mind can bridge gaps if all the other facets of what a good player is are of a high enough level. That is not to say Di Stefano was a donkey - he was far, far from that, but when you see players like Platini or Maradona pass the ball 50+ yards with utter mastery, or a L.Ronaldo or Messi scuttling through a team's defense in the blink of an eye, it's apparent Di Stefano could not match those players in those aspects, but then when you expand the game to include tactical nous, movement, positioning, timing, judgement and so on Di Stefano just goes further and further up the ranking to the point where whether he's ranked 1st. 2nd or 3rd of the 'Big 3,' it's totally understandable and very probably a generational matter.
