Nordic Ghost Yeti (Scandi Carroll) | Haaland at City

[Libero_of_Yore]

Well obviously yes, Messi was considered a true great before he won the copa America and the world cup, its not as if that status had only been attained in the last couple years, people were saying it as early as 2012. Same with Ronaldo, he's the all time top scorer but he was considered a great before that, around the same time as Messi (a bit later but not much). So while these players did add international achievements they were considered greats before either did

There's a huge difference here. Messi and Ronaldo to a lesser degree possessed footballing ability and reached levels on a football pitch few in history ever have. Likewise Cruyff and the reason he is regarded as a GOAT despite no International trophies (though he does that WC74 run).
Haaland has neither the ability/ game, nor will ever reach the footballing level of pre 2021 Messi, Cristiano without a Euros, Cruyff. They are literally planets of Haaland in that regard. An out of this world goalscorer, with basic footballing ability (compared to the GOATs) and zero International success would never touch the 10 of all time.

 

[Zehner]

No, it's that scoring goals matters more, but there's more to a player being a great goalscorer than good finishing. A player with no positional sense and no pace can be the best finisher in the world and he won't score many goals. I'm saying being a goalscorer is more valuable, but there's more to being a goalscorer than finishing.

Well yes, that should be obvious, when they're sold, goalscorers go for huge amounts. Ronadlo at 33, by that point basically a pure goalscorer went for 100m. People on here will be happy if we spend 100m on a top goalscorer, but there were reservations over 70m on casemiro, not because he isn't talented but because there's the expectation that goalscorers are more expensive. Lewandowski moved once on a free transfer then for 50m when he was forciny his way out at 34 with a year left on his contract, kane hasn't moved, benzema was signed for 35m in 2009 before fees went crazy, still a promising prospect, suarez went for 80m in 2014, haaland went for 50m but that's because of a release clause. Ronaldo moved for 80m when it was a world record and Messi didn't move until 33 when his contract expired.

It's quite obvious that top goalscorers are more valuable, its not reflected in the recent transfer fees because the best scorers haven't moved in this period

Do you realize that you're always providing excuses why in this particular case the price wasn't as high? I mean, surely there has to be a transfer of a top striker that went for the correct market price? Don't you think that there are such excuses for the other transfers as well? Hazard for instance went for a potential 140m (!) despite only having one year on his contract.

I also took a quick glance at the top 50 most expensive transfers at the highest ranking striker is Lukaku at 8. 11 players are strikers, 20 are wingers/attacking midfielders, 9 are central midfielders, 7 are CBs, 1 is a FB, 2 are keepers. Only looking at the top 10, only 1 is a striker but 7 are wingers/attacking mids, 2 are CMs. The most prevalent attributes among those 10 definitely seem to be dribbling/technique (Neymar, Mbappe, Felix, Coutinho, Griezmann, Grealish, Dembele) and passing (Neymar, Felix, Fernandez, Coutinho, Griezmann, Pogba). Great goalscorers were only Mbappe and Lukaku (maybe Griezmann and Neymar to a lesser degree). Even pace (Mbappe, Dembele) and strength (Lukaku, Pogba) is quite rare.

Note that that list doesn't include unrealized bonus fees. If it did, Pogba would be excluded and Lukaku would drop to 10 with Hazard and Dembele placing higher.

 

[jm99]

Do you realize that you're always providing excuses why in this particular case the price wasn't as high? I mean, surely there has to be a transfer of a top striker that went for the correct market price? Don't you think that there are such excuses for the other transfers as well? Hazard for instance went for a potential 140m (!) despite only having one year on his contract.

I also took a quick glance at the top 50 most expensive transfers at the highest ranking striker is Lukaku at 8. 11 players are strikers, 20 are wingers/attacking midfielders, 9 are central midfielders, 7 are CBs, 1 is a FB, 2 are keepers. Only looking at the top 10, only 1 is a striker but 7 are wingers/attacking mids, 2 are CMs. The most prevalent attributes among those 10 definitely seem to be dribbling/technique (Neymar, Mbappe, Felix, Coutinho, Griezmann, Grealish, Dembele) and passing (Neymar, Felix, Fernandez, Coutinho, Griezmann, Pogba). Great goalscorers were only Mbappe and Lukaku (maybe Griezmann and Neymar to a lesser degree). Even pace (Mbappe, Dembele) and strength (Lukaku, Pogba) is quite rare.

Note that that list doesn't include unrealized bonus fees. If it did, Pogba would be excluded and Lukaku would drop to 10 with Hazard and Dembele placing higher.

Again most of the record transfers have happened within the last 5-6 years because fees have gone crazy, and during that time, the best strikers have been kane, haaland, lewandoowski, benzema and I guess if you count Ronaldo as a top striker when he left Madrid rather than a winger, its debatable. Two of those players have moved but one was a 50m release clause and the other moved at 34 with a year left om his contract refusing to renew and still went for 50m. Ronaldo went for 100m at 33. Look at our targets in the summer osihmen, kane, ramos, all being talked about with a fee of around 100m. Lukaku has gone for 80m twice and 100m once despite not actually being very good, but you'll only count that once, but 3 separate clubs (united, Inter and chelsea) deemed that a fairly average striker was worth 80m plus. Since 2017 he's accumulated 260m in transfer fees, that's what I mean by goalscorers being more valuable if you take the prices paid for lukaku as a benchmark, peak kane, lewandowski, haaland, benzema are 150m plus easily

 

[giorno]

James keeps getting trotted out as an example of a player signed off the back of a great world cup that wasn't worth it and on the one hand sure, i understand why that is, but also, James was a phenomenal player. The problem with him wasn't that he wasn't worth every cent, it's that once he got international fame he lost motivation for football, let himself go physically and became more interested in banging pornstars than training properly

 

[cafecillos]

FFS can you please, please, keep the CR-Messi shite out of other threads? It's fine if you just want to embarrass yourselves to no end defending multimillionaires you don't know, just don't take it out of its specific thread.

 

[jm99]

There's a huge difference here. Messi and Ronaldo to a lesser degree possessed footballing ability and reached levels on a football pitch few in history ever have. Likewise Cruyff and the reason he is regarded as a GOAT despite no International trophies (though he does that WC74 run).
Haaland has neither the ability/ game, nor will ever reach the footballing level of pre 2021 Messi, Cristiano without a Euros, Cruyff. They are literally planets of Haaland in that regard. An out of this world goalscorer, with basic footballing ability (compared to the GOATs) and zero International success would never touch the 10 of all time.

I don't know, he doesn't have the same footballing ability, but he's scoring at a higher rate than anyone in the modern game. It's a massive ask, and obviously one of the biggest things Messi and Ronaldo had was their longevity compared to others with a shorter peak. But if he kept this kind of scoring rate for 10-15 years, whatever his ability, he'll be in the top 10, it would be impossible not to be. Now, I don't think he will, he's built in a way that you feel injuries might plague him or he could burnout early, but it would be hard to argue against someone who scored more frequently than messi's best season but for a decade

 

[jm99]

James keeps getting trotted out as an example of a player signed off the back of a great world cup that wasn't worth it and on the one hand sure, i understand why that is, but also, James was a phenomenal player. The problem with him wasn't that he wasn't worth every cent, it's that once he got international fame he lost motivation for football, let himself go physically and became more interested in banging pornstars than training properly

It's just that he's a very notable example of having excelled at a world cup, landed a big transfer and not performed. Its part of an overall trend that signing players on the back of a good world cup is rarely successful

 

[jm99]

FFS can you please, please, keep the CR-Messi shite out of other threads? It's fine if you just want to embarrass yourselves to no end defending multimillionaires you don't know, just don't take it out of its specific thread.

Mentioning messi and Ronaldo as players who achieved greatness pre international success isn't the same as a debate

 

[Andrade]

Is "clueless" the insult or have I missed something worse? Is that even an insult (genuine question as I'm not a native speaker and sometimes miss the nuance)?

I find it a bit bizarre that calling a post "moronic" is perfectly fine, but calling a poster something as mild as "clueless" (if there was indeed nothing worse). Taking the "attack the post not the poster" so literally is a bit silly in my view. It makes the joke people sometimes post ("that post was a cnut" or something to that effect) not a joke but an actual hack to insulting people

Yes, 'clueless' was the supposed insult. Calling a post 'moronic' however is apparently fine. Pretty clear what the person means when they say that but hey-ho, we move on.

 

[Gehrman]

FFS can you please, please, keep the CR-Messi shite out of other threads? It's fine if you just want to embarrass yourselves to no end defending multimillionaires you don't know, just don't take it out of its specific thread.

The specific thread got closed so now its spilling over.

 

[cafecillos]

The specific thread got closed so now its spilling over.

Didn't know that as it was on my ignored threads list. Not sure it was such a good idea to close it, these people evidently can't help themselves, at least that thread was a chance of containment.

 

[jm99]

Is "clueless" the insult or have I missed something worse? Is that even an insult (genuine question as I'm not a native speaker and sometimes miss the nuance)?

I find it a bit bizarre that calling a post "moronic" is perfectly fine, but calling a poster something as mild as "clueless" (if there was indeed nothing worse). Taking the "attack the post not the poster" so literally is a bit silly in my view. It makes the joke people sometimes post ("that post was a cnut" or something to that effect) not a joke but an actual hack to insulting people

You're misreading it. The mod is telling andrade not to bother reporting the post because calling a post moronic isn't an issue. Calling him a moron would be, he's not saying clueless is an insult, he's saying that moronic isn't, so don't bother reporting it. It's worded a little unclearly but I'm pretty sure that's the intent

 

[giorno]

It's just that he's a very notable example of having excelled at a world cup, landed a big transfer and not performed. Its part of an overall trend that signing players on the back of a good world cup is rarely successful

He did perform though, that's the thing. His first season in madrid he was incredible. His first at bayern when he had something to prove as well. His problem was always one of motivation

 

[cafecillos]

You're misreading it. The mod is telling andrade not to bother reporting the post because calling a post moronic isn't an issue. Calling him a moron would be, he's not saying clueless is an insult, he's saying that moronic isn't, so don't bother reporting it. It's worded a little unclearly but I'm pretty sure that's the intent

Nope, the post is flagged as "Insulting another member".

 

[jm99]

Nope, the post is flagged as "Insulting another member".

I can't see that on the clueless post

 

[cafecillos]

I can't see that on the clueless post

 

[jm99]

Ah OK, I was looking at another one. I think the issue is that he calls the poster clueless, rather than his opinion, whereas the other guy called his opinion moronic but didn't call him moronic. It seems quite arbitrary but I guess one is considered a personal attack and the other an attack on an opinion, personally i wouldn't ever report anyone no matter what they said to me, or want them to get a warning but I guess that's the rules, I got a warning myself for something similar recently

 

[Fortitude]

It's just that he's a very notable example of having excelled at a world cup, landed a big transfer and not performed. Its part of an overall trend that signing players on the back of a good world cup is rarely successful

Is it? I asked you to expand on this to the positive and negative and see where it leads you.

 

[Noot]

Benzema has been performing at a high level since 19 also, he just had to play a secondary more playmaking role to help get the best out of one of the greatest players of all time, if he had not played alongside a Ronaldo he would have been showing the type of form he has been showing now much sooner, that if anything speaks for his overall greatness.

A high level yeah, but he hasn't been at Haaland's current level until very recently. I don't buy that it's all Ronaldo's fault. Playing alongside one of the best of all time should make Benzema better, not worse.

 

[ThierryHenry14]

Haaland obviously has great goal scoring ability/Instinct, positioning, anticipation, physical attributes, pace and acceleration. He is a great goal scorer, however to me he doesn't have great football technique like the great players being mentioned like Maradona, Messi, R9, and even Ibrahimovic. He doesn't have the same skill level with the ball like these players. People generally appreciated more for players with great technique.

 

[Andrade]

Haaland obviously has great goal scoring ability/Instinct, positioning, anticipation, physical attributes, pace and acceleration. He is a great goal scorer, however to me he doesn't have great football technique like the great players being mentioned like Maradona, Messi, R9, and even Ibrahimovic. He doesn't have the same skill level with the ball like these players. People generally appreciated more for players with great technique.

When the discussion is had about the greatest goalscorer of all time, his name will be brought up (if he continues in this vein). But when the discussion is had about the greatest player of all time, his name will not be brought up.

 

[Righteous Steps]

A high level yeah, but he hasn't been at Haaland's current level until very recently. I don't buy that it's all Ronaldo's fault. Playing alongside one of the best of all time should make Benzema better, not worse.

It made him a better creator and worse goal scorer, and won him a lot of trophies.

 

[Ladron de redcafe]

Is "clueless" the insult or have I missed something worse? Is that even an insult (genuine question as I'm not a native speaker and sometimes miss the nuance)?

I find it a bit bizarre that calling a post "moronic" is perfectly fine, but calling a poster something as mild as "clueless" (if there was indeed nothing worse). Taking the "attack the post not the poster" so literally is a bit silly in my view. It makes the joke people sometimes post ("that post was a cnut" or something to that effect) not a joke but an actual hack to insulting people

Yes, 'clueless' was the supposed insult. Calling a post 'moronic' however is apparently fine. Pretty clear what the person means when they say that but hey-ho, we move on.

More than a little odd, but the same thing happened last year by the same person, so it isnt that surprising. As Andrade said, move on. Who cares about consistency, eh?

 

[Ladron de redcafe]

When the discussion is had about the greatest goalscorer of all time, his name will be brought up (if he continues in this vein). But when the discussion is had about the greatest player of all time, his name will not be brought up.

Summed up perfectly. It might be close to a Gerd Muller situation, even though I think he'll end up with a better legacy. If he begins to rack up Balon d'ors, that's going to help him go down as a top 10 player. Let's see how his career unfolds.

 

[NotThatSoph]

I noticed nobody mentioned Ingebrigtsen. Is he not famous?

I feel pretty certain that Warholm would beat Ingebrigsten. Middle distance isn't very high profile at the moment, he's not dominating the field on either 1500m or 5k despite winning golds, and he's not particularly close to any WRs.

 

[Son]

"Can a player be the greatest of all time without international performances of repute?" Is a thread you should start and see what criteria comes up for such a person to be in the running.

I don't think there's such a thing as a true great who hasn't delivered on the international stage relative to his nation's relative capabilities, though.

Di Stefano could. He was the GOAT before Pele and still top 5 of all time.

 

[Libero_of_Yore]

Di Stefano could. He was the GOAT before Pele and still top 5 of all time.

Huge difference, as mentioned before. Di Stefano, as a football player, played at a level few before Pele had reached. He was an insanely complete football player who ran games. Erling Haalands footballing ability is too basic to ever be considered close to the likes of Di Stefano and Cruyff. No international trophies, basic footballing ability. Top 30 of all time at best.

 

[Andrade]

Summed up perfectly. It might be close to a Gerd Muller situation, even though I think he'll end up with a better legacy. If he begins to rack up Balon d'ors, that's going to help him go down as a top 10 player. Let's see how his career unfolds.

Yes indeed. Although Muller was incredibly successful on a team trophy level and he scored in multiple European Cup finals, the Euros final and the World Cup final. Apart from his volume of goals, he was the man for the big occasion. Obviously Haaland cannot do anything like that at international level but we will have to see if he can garner a reputation sort of like that with his clubs. Right now we don't know. And as far as him racking up Ballon D'Ors, of course it is possible but I think it is unlikely that he will do so in the same way that Messi and Ronaldo did. Because no one has done it like they did. If he even gets 2 or 3 it will be extremely impressive. And he likely won't have international football glory to help him like a lot of other BDO winners have.

 

[Zehner]

I don't really get why Haaland shouldn't be able to shine on the international stage? Sure, Norway has been bad usually but they've acquired quite a team with Haaland and Ödegaard as world class players and a very solid supporting cast with Ryerson, Ajer, Berge, Elyounoussi, etc. No team with which he can realistically win a title but individually they are definitely better than many teams that made headlines in the last tournaments. I'd say it would be a disappointment if they wouldn't at least improve on their best world cup finish (last 16) during Haaland's career.

 

[Tom Cato]

When the discussion is had about the greatest goalscorer of all time, his name will be brought up (if he continues in this vein). But when the discussion is had about the greatest player of all time, his name will not be brought up.

Damn, that is quite some glass ball you have there.

 

[fck]

Damn, that is quite some glass ball you have there.

Never say never but he's not going out on a limb with that prediction. He can be an all time great sure but greatest player of all time would be extremely unlikely.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

I think he’ll carefully manage his career and win a league title in England, Spain, Italy, Germany and any of the other leagues he values. Cant see him staying anywhere more than 2-3 seasons.

Mad to say, but if City won the treble this year I reckon he’d be up for a move.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

I don't really get why Haaland shouldn't be able to shine on the international stage? Sure, Norway has been bad usually but they've acquired quite a team with Haaland and Ödegaard as world class players and a very solid supporting cast with Ryerson, Ajer, Berge, Elyounoussi, etc. No team with which he can realistically win a title but individually they are definitely better than many teams that made headlines in the last tournaments. I'd say it would be a disappointment if they wouldn't at least improve on their best world cup finish (last 16) during Haaland's career.

I agree and also the Euros and World Cup have been expanded. If he never plays in the World Cup it’s a failure, or gets to the knockout stages of the Euros. Nobody expects them to win it but at least qualify. Odegaard + Haaland front 2 is far better than 95% of international teams, think of what Bale and Ramsey achieved with Wales and they’re better again.

 

[zaafi]

I don't really get why Haaland shouldn't be able to shine on the international stage? Sure, Norway has been bad usually but they've acquired quite a team with Haaland and Ödegaard as world class players and a very solid supporting cast with Ryerson, Ajer, Berge, Elyounoussi, etc. No team with which he can realistically win a title but individually they are definitely better than many teams that made headlines in the last tournaments. I'd say it would be a disappointment if they wouldn't at least improve on their best world cup finish (last 16) during Haaland's career.

We're just so mentally weak and succumb to pressure. We can have an excellent half against Spain, only to lose to Slovenia or Romania when that is the match we need to win. It's embarrassing, really. Denmark, Sweden and even Iceland go through, but Norway just can't go to an international tournament. We've easily got the players for it, individually, but as a team they just fall apart too often.

 

[Andrade]

Damn, that is quite some glass ball you have there.

That would be a crystal ball. A glass ball won't do you much good.

 

[Zehner]

We're just so mentally weak and succumb to pressure. We can have an excellent half against Spain, only to lose to Slovenia or Romania when that is the match we need to win. It's embarrassing, really. Denmark, Sweden and even Iceland go through, but Norway just can't go to an international tournament. We've easily got the players for it, individually, but as a team they just fall apart too often.

Yeah, I read that quite a couple of times and I',m sure you're right but from the outside, I still think this would be a weak excuse. I mean, why is that? If the team is mentally weak then this has to do with the players and the leadership. But Haaland has a decade of international football ahead of him so he'll be playing with almost completely different sets of players and of all those players, he himself will probably have the biggest influence on the dressing room. There are more than enough examples of teams improving significantly with a golden generation. And I believe that this team will at some point be among the top 10 in a tournament in terms of individual quality alone. As said, they already have a strong spine of players that can provide a platform to shine for two world class ones.

 

[Eriku]

I don't really get why Haaland shouldn't be able to shine on the international stage? Sure, Norway has been bad usually but they've acquired quite a team with Haaland and Ödegaard as world class players and a very solid supporting cast with Ryerson, Ajer, Berge, Elyounoussi, etc. No team with which he can realistically win a title but individually they are definitely better than many teams that made headlines in the last tournaments. I'd say it would be a disappointment if they wouldn't at least improve on their best world cup finish (last 16) during Haaland's career.

Lucky you that you’re not Norwegian with those expectations.

 

[Zehner]

Lucky you that you’re not Norwegian with those expectations.

You have the arguably best player of the EPL first and the arguably best player of the EPL second and in your last squad there were 12 additional players from top 5 leagues, many of them starters. That's a very good level for a national side.

 

[Andrade]

I don't really get why Haaland shouldn't be able to shine on the international stage? Sure, Norway has been bad usually but they've acquired quite a team with Haaland and Ödegaard as world class players and a very solid supporting cast with Ryerson, Ajer, Berge, Elyounoussi, etc. No team with which he can realistically win a title but individually they are definitely better than many teams that made headlines in the last tournaments. I'd say it would be a disappointment if they wouldn't at least improve on their best world cup finish (last 16) during Haaland's career.

Are Norway better than Poland? Is it a Lewandowski situation or should they have greater expectations because they also have Odegaard (and also because Haaland is more prolific than Lewa)? RL has managed to help Poland get to major tournaments but that's about it.

 

[Eriku]

You have the arguably best player of the EPL first and the arguably best player of the EPL second and in your last squad there were 12 additional players from top 5 leagues, many of them starters. That's a very good level for a national side.

You’ve had a bunch of Norwegians make their case for why optimism is unwise.
Ødegaard and Haaland are a cut above what we’ve had before, sure. But our overall team was stronger in the early and mid 2000s.

Also, did you see our game against Georgia? I’m gonna guess no? Ødegaard blasted the ball over from point blank range. List superficial shit that should be encouraging all you want, some of us have decades following our piece of shit team and we know we’ll fumble it at some point.