Champions league?
Luka Modric
- Thread starter Eddy_JukeZ
- Start date
Care to explain how he is not exactly?
What a strange comment. He'd walk into the team as the playmaker-turned-workhorse instead of Cerezo, because he's clearly more talented and has the all-round skillset and mentality to make it work, but he'd have to fight for a place against the rest. He couldn't replicate what Socrates or Zico brought to the table and Falcao has all the same qualities Modric has...just without the same level of elegance.Cerezo-Falcao-Socrates-Zico. You're setting the bar pretty low
Cerezo was one of the greatest DM in the history of football, and a perfect foil for Falcao. He's the one player Modric would have no chance to replace
Still, those are 4 all time greats. Not getting into that team says nothing about Modric not being one of the best midfielders ever.
Still, those are 4 all time greats. Not getting into that team says nothing about Modric not being one of the best midfielders ever.
Oh I totally missed the sarcasm...I thought you were saying Modric was so superior it was laughable! Cerezo wasn't a DM he was an all-round CM that got forced into the role for Brazil because of the other three. Throughout his club career he played ahead of a DM like this or alongside one like this. In Brazil sometimes he was an AM. I think Modric would've done the same here.
Yeah, my point about Cerezo was descriptive
What do you mean? Outside of those 20-odd games for Brazil he was never a DM. It's just that the rest of his career, while impressive, isn't that memorable...so he's mistakenly called that on Wiki and the like because of essentially one month of football. His most frequent, most natural and best role was much the same as Falcao's or Modric's.
Well Glaston, he's improved at Madrid since taking over from Alonso but doesnt have the same impact the goat CMs had.
Iniesta took some time to finally produce in the final third, but managed several seasons where he assisted and scored over 10 goals. His most productive being 19 combined.
Modric has never been over 8. He's usually come up with 6.
Iniesta made more dribbles and more passes. Modric is a bit better defensively but wasnt a completely solid holding midfielder when used there and Madrid are better with Casemiro doing most of that work for him and Kroos, just like Iniesta and Xavi needed Yaya and then Busquets
He's still obviously a very good CM, but he's some way short of the likes of Iniesta who I personally don't think is at the same level as Xavi either. So yeah one of the best now and in the past year or two but not one of the best ever.
Taking Cerezo out for Modric would make the midfield unbalanced, Cerezo defensive ability far exceeds Modric’s. Modric is more talented of the two no disagreement there but Cerezo gives the much needed glue to stick the midfield together.
Remember the Galaticos when they got rid of Makelele, and then it fell apart, I would expect something similar would happen by swapping Cerezo with Modric
Great read.
I think that comparison only works as far as them both being black, energetic and pretty quick. Otherwise he had far more in common with Modric than Makelele. The Cerezo that played in '82 Brazil bears very little resemblance to the Cerezo in Roma, Sampdoria or back in Brazil - it's just the fact that almost no-one watched him outside of the '82 WC, so the false impression is pretty widespread.
That he was one of the greatest midfielders ever in defensive aspects. He was similar to Xabi Alonso, Busquets or Schweinsteiger. But better
Why do you think Roma played a DM behind him and Sao Paulo played him as an AM in that case? Seems a waste
Glaston, what the hell?
Using Makelele more of an extreme example rather than a comparison, obviously Cerezo was much more than a water carrier, but Cerezo was better than Modric at interceptions and tracking runners
While he's being mentioned here, i've got to say Xavi's physical progression as a player through his career is one of the most unusual i've witnessed. I was a la liga fanatic back when he emerged and was hyped as the next Guardiola, but often struggled under that expectation for the next 5\6 seasons. The funny thing was i could see he was fundamentally excellent very early on(as early as 99-00 and 00-01) he rarely lost the ball even then and had much the same eye for the right short pass to play as he did in the later glory years, yet for a young player it was the workrate and physical attributes side of things he seemed to be rather average in(similar issues though not nearly as bad as De La Pena had).
He certainly wasn't outrunning everyone and playing the most passes every game back then, it was the older Cocu(a very fine passer that seems underrated nowadays) that was the central workhorse and main organiser of the team and in midfield battles with the better la liga midfields of the time i rarely saw him show a higher workrate off the ball to make himself a more consistent passing outlet than older players he was competing with(some already in their 30s) like Zidane, Figo, Baraja, Mendieta, Valeron, Mauro Silva, Mostovoi, Karpin.
Then around the time between 2006 World Cup and the great first season with Guardiola his workrate off the ball and ability to consistently offer himself as an outlet or press when needed went up considerably and stayed like that into his 30s, he went from being a somewhat typical(of the time and preceding era's) highly skilled, yet a bit physically weak and not too mobile at times Iberian creative midfielder to a pressing\off the ball beast with enough constantly moving workrate to give the recently deceased Lobanovsky a hard-on.
Quite possible this was simply a testament to a team really clicking, changing systems, better manager and maturing as a player + having an all-time great now in the team who could drop back and interact brilliantly with the midfield, but it's not like those earlier Barca teams had scrubs in midfield alongside him or played that much differently, yet he was nowhere near as dominant or consistently mobile and this was over half a decade not just an early season or two. If i had a gun to my head and was forced to make a correct pick of one player that i thought had benefited from cutting edge performance enhancing drugs, but never was caught it would be him.
He certainly wasn't outrunning everyone and playing the most passes every game back then, it was the older Cocu(a very fine passer that seems underrated nowadays) that was the central workhorse and main organiser of the team and in midfield battles with the better la liga midfields of the time i rarely saw him show a higher workrate off the ball to make himself a more consistent passing outlet than older players he was competing with(some already in their 30s) like Zidane, Figo, Baraja, Mendieta, Valeron, Mauro Silva, Mostovoi, Karpin.
Then around the time between 2006 World Cup and the great first season with Guardiola his workrate off the ball and ability to consistently offer himself as an outlet or press when needed went up considerably and stayed like that into his 30s, he went from being a somewhat typical(of the time and preceding era's) highly skilled, yet a bit physically weak and not too mobile at times Iberian creative midfielder to a pressing\off the ball beast with enough constantly moving workrate to give the recently deceased Lobanovsky a hard-on.
Quite possible this was simply a testament to a team really clicking, changing systems, better manager and maturing as a player + having an all-time great now in the team who could drop back and interact brilliantly with the midfield, but it's not like those earlier Barca teams had scrubs in midfield alongside him or played that much differently, yet he was nowhere near as dominant or consistently mobile and this was over half a decade not just an early season or two. If i had a gun to my head and was forced to make a correct pick of one player that i thought had benefited from cutting edge performance enhancing drugs, but never was caught it would be him.
Just a call back to Glaston and Scholesy talking him up way beyond what he isGlaston, what the hell?
Very good post, agree with everything said.
All majestic players but Xavi has to be No.1, he was a fecking wizard in midfield.
Fair enough. Let's start afresh.
They are both probably my favorite kind of players. I think Modric is brilliant and doesnt get the praise he truly deserves. At the same time I do consider Xavi and Iniesta in a clear tier above. Regarding Scholes, Modric's highest level is a bit higher but Scholes' longevity, success and adaptability (he beats all the other three in this regard) pushes him above Modric for me. The man was a beast of a second striker and decided games with goals too. But I can see the validity of rating Modric higher too. He's a brilliant footballer.
Scholes won two of them. How many league titles in a top league did Modric win ? There's no way 4 CLs and 2 La Ligas matches 2 CLs and a bazillion PLs and complete domination of English football. Sometimes going by some posts here I feel Sir Alex achieved feck all in his career.
This isn't really accurate. @giorno is spot on about Cerezo being a DM. Cerezo began as a DM at Atletico Mineiro and first made a name for himself as a world class holding mid. Here is Placar's Bola de Prata in 1977. Cerezo won best player in the Brazilian league as a holding mid.
Noitice that Cerezo is first place as medio-volante which is the holding midfielder in Brazilian tactics. He played for as a world class DM for Mineiro, a lot more than just 20 games for Brazil. And he wasn't put in a position that he wasn't natural in to accommodate anyone else. He was playing in his natural position where he established himself as one of the best players in Brazil. He was more of a complete CM when in Roma and then later for Sampdoria and then when he went back to São Paolo to finish his career with Tele he moved up the pitch as he got older. That 1993 Intercontinental Cup (love that match btw) was at the end of his career.
So I tend to agree with giorno that Modric's skill set simply doesn't replicate Cerezo's as a holding mid (volante) and Modric wouldn't get into that side. Not a knock on his quality but Cerezo absolutely had better holding mid credentials as shown above.
Also being part of a European Cup runner-up with Roma, then helping Sampdoria win Serie A when that league was filled with talent and finish runners-up in the EC, then go back to Brazil at end of his career and be the final ingredient in Tele Santana's São Paolo side that won two Copa Libertadores then beat both Cruyff's Barcelona and Capello's Milan in consecutive Intercontinental Cups is pretty memorable in my eyes!
Last edited:
Modric plays deeper then Iniesta so it's logical for him to have less goals and assists.
....he was one of the most complete midfielders around. He could do a bit of everything at an elite level. In Italy he mostly played a similar role to the guys i mentioned, he was basically a sort of box-to-box Xabi Alonso. With Kante's engine
Defensively -the main job he had on that Brazil was DM. Win the ball, shield the defence, build up attacking play. He had less licence to roam forward- he was one of the best ever. On the level of guys like Kante or Makelele.
What would you say by controlling midfielders? Midfielders who can distribute the ball? I would put Kroos higher than Schweinsteiger because he is better at passing the ball than Schweinsteiger was, although Schweinsteiger was the better midfielder overall because of his ability to play both as an attacking midfielder and also a defensive one.
In terms of controlling midfielders:
Xavi
Pirlo
Scholes
Kroos
Alonso
Modric
Schweinsteiger
I don't think Iniesta is the controlling midfielder type of the others mentioned above
As overall midfielders:
Xavi
Iniesta
Scholes/Schweinsteiger
Modric
Pirlo
Kroos
Alonso
He plays as 1 of 2 CMs next to a DM. He also used to play our wide just like Iniesta was used there. He is simply less productive.
Slight generalisation from myself. I suppose midfielders involved in their sides rythem of play from a deeper area. So ignoring your direct attacking influencers like kaka, Gerrard. Although though that could be confused with Iniesta like you say who probably played a bit further on than Xavi when both lined up. I’m suprised you have Scholes so high up when he wasn’t always our first choice when he was doing that role. Although that is to do with age at the time it has to be considered. I couldn’t see the other players in list not being used by their side because of how important they were.
Scholes did play that role though in his 30's and played it very well. I suppose you are referring to the period when Veron was signed and was played more in that role than Scholes? I think post 2006 with Carrick and Scholes, Scholes was amongst the best players in that role.
Why do I get the feeling that in 25 years time, someone will be making a similar post like this about Modric?
I was referring to the period after his eye injury. He sort of transformed from a box to box goal scoring midfielder to the deeper midfield role. From 2007 he was rotational with Anderson,Hargreaves,Fletcher and Carrick. Although clearly our best midfielder and amazing. I was pointing out that the other midfielders were all guaranteed starting for their team, which I’d imagine Scholes would have been too if not for his age at the time.
You are lying.
Iniesta hasn't scored 10 or more goals in a season in his whole career, not even once. His record is 9 goals in a season.
In fact, he averages 8.8 assists and 3.5 goals per season in his carrer.
And then, comapring gaols and assists between them is nosense, because Modric in Madrid plays much deeper and as an organizer, and Iniesta as an offensive mid and a lot of seasons he played in the left wing.
You are bad at reading. Try again
I also consider Xavi and Iniesta in a tier above of other MFs. But then you can't totally ignore Messi effect. It's also interesting that they all started to flourish and dominate the game at the same time around 2008 until the arrival of Enrique who built a more direct and counter-attacking team. Unfortunately, there are many factors that you can't look at them separately like assists or goals. When you are playing with a player like Messi - who brings 60-70 goals and assists for fun - then, of course, your own G+A increases significantly.
I think we're getting to the stage where people are using different definitions of DMs and going round in circles. What your graphic tells us if you have to choose between defining him as a medio-volante or a meia-armador, he'll be put into the latter - but the Brazilian classification doesn't cover off the group of midfielders in between those two, the all-round, all-action CMs. Which is what the original discussion was about. He was a "DM" in the sense that someone who plays in the midfield 2 of a 4231 is a DM - but then by that definition Modric was a DM for a significant portion of his career, which brings us back to square 1 in the conversation. What would Falcao be defined as within that classification system?
Anyyyyyyyway, I think we've taken this off topic far enough.
Same with Ronaldo
Falcão had a similar trajectory in his rise in Brazil. At the start, in his breakthrough year he played as a volante (steering wheel). He won the Bola de Prata for Volante in 1975. Then, like Cerezo after he proved his skill set as the defensive most midfielder he was moved up and paired with a more defensive partner. They are examples of people who first broke through as the defensive most midfielder in their sides and then quickly proved to be even more valuable filling more demanding roles.
The best way to describe Cerezo's play style would really be a more mobile, active Busquets or Xabi Alonso. If Cerezo was going to replace anyone in a Pep Barca remake, young Cerezo (76-82) would absolutely be replacing Busquets while you could argue older Cerezo could only replace one of the other two. At no point in Modric's career would he be the one replacing Busquets.
Anyway its just not correct to authoritatively declare that he "only played DM for 20 games". That just isn't a true statement mate.
That completely ignores his entire young career at Atletico Mineiro and how he broke through in the first place , first as the most defensive midfielder and then he was moved further up the pitch. He really isn't comparable to Modric and its just not true that at any point in Modric's career he could play as defensively as young Cerezo (76-82).
When was that? If the answer is Spurs don't bother replying, you really don't know what you're talking about in this thread.
When was that? I guess lot has happen since then.
You answered your own question and you don't own this thread.
He did used to play out wide. He was a wide attacker when he first came on the scene
No he didn't, he played about half a season for spurs as left winger and that was it. For Croatia he always played as CM, and for Dinamo he played as attacking midfielder.