No Virgilinho either. Shithouse team.
Official Ballon D'Or Dream Team (best team of all time)
- Thread starter GameOn
- Start date
It turns so easily into a real team by dropping Luiz Ronaldo for Baresi:
--------------------------Pele---------------------
Cristiano---------Maradona-------Messi
------------------Matthaus-Xavi--------------
Maldini-Beckenbauer-Baresi---Cafu
------------------------Yashin--------------------
2nd team, you drop out Baresi for Luiz Ronaldo and now need to cut Pirlo and upgrade the next CB in Ramos:
--------------------------Ronaldo------------------------
--------Ronaldinho----------Zidane---------------------
--------------DiStefano---Cruyff---------------Garrincha
Roberto Carlos------Rijkaard--------------
-------------------------Ramos---------Carlos Alberto
------------------------Yashin--------------------
It looks bizarre and would need to win a lot of 4-3 games, but it also kind of makes sense considering Di Stefano, Cruyff and Rijkaard could all make plays in the middle be 2-way players in front of the lone centre back Ramos, even with the attacking left back unbalancing things. Also Zizou could go into older control the game mode to help the midfield battle in a diamond basically, and you'd have great width from Roberto Carlos and Garrincha to open up the middle. More balanced by dropping Zizou or Ronaldinho for a CB or even a DM to double with Rijkaard in front of a lone CB in Ramos, but I dunno this team wouldn't necessarily lose to that one every week I don't think.
--------------------------Pele---------------------
Cristiano---------Maradona-------Messi
------------------Matthaus-Xavi--------------
Maldini-Beckenbauer-Baresi---Cafu
------------------------Yashin--------------------
2nd team, you drop out Baresi for Luiz Ronaldo and now need to cut Pirlo and upgrade the next CB in Ramos:
--------------------------Ronaldo------------------------
--------Ronaldinho----------Zidane---------------------
--------------DiStefano---Cruyff---------------Garrincha
Roberto Carlos------Rijkaard--------------
-------------------------Ramos---------Carlos Alberto
------------------------Yashin--------------------
It looks bizarre and would need to win a lot of 4-3 games, but it also kind of makes sense considering Di Stefano, Cruyff and Rijkaard could all make plays in the middle be 2-way players in front of the lone centre back Ramos, even with the attacking left back unbalancing things. Also Zizou could go into older control the game mode to help the midfield battle in a diamond basically, and you'd have great width from Roberto Carlos and Garrincha to open up the middle. More balanced by dropping Zizou or Ronaldinho for a CB or even a DM to double with Rijkaard in front of a lone CB in Ramos, but I dunno this team wouldn't necessarily lose to that one every week I don't think.
Guarantee Southgate would get Mason Mount into any starting 11.
I honestly thought the Scholes posts were joke comments at first glance. Should have known better 
If has to be Messi, Cruyff C.Ronaldo.
It’s the Ballon D’or best team ever, how can you not have a 5 time winner of it in the team? He should be more nailed on to be in the team than every single player except Messi, because he has won 1 more. Ron walks into this team no debate imo.
The problem for me is that there is too much shoehorning and I think that it's one of the worst things about best XI, instead of making actual choices that make sense people just decide that certain players absolutely have to be in the team which in my opinion isn't true. For example, I'm not picking Zidane above Ribéry as a left winger and I'm not putting Amoros on the left and Thuram on the right when I have Lizararzu and Amoros available. Also I think that it's accepeted that Vieira isn't above Deschamps and neither are above Giresse.
Matthäus was great and all. But does he really make it to the best 11?
I might be colored, but I feel Keane, Vieira, Makelele and others were better players. Not a stretch to say Scholes, Gerrard would fit that role better neither.
I might be colored, but I feel Keane, Vieira, Makelele and others were better players. Not a stretch to say Scholes, Gerrard would fit that role better neither.
Matthaus is arguably the best B2B midfielder ever and definitely deserved in the all-time XI than Keane, Vieira, Makelele, Scholes, and Gerrard.
It's kind of a stretch when some of these players the french in particular have compatriots above them. Matthäus is recognized has arguably the best in his role since he was very good defensively and technically. Maybe someone like Falcao could be argued in his stead?
No complaints. Great team.
The only ones which may slightly contestable are Yashin, Cafu and Xavi.
To be fair he's very dedocared too and captained the german side that won the boring World Cup in 1990. I mostly saw the late Matthäus playing as a sweeper so maybe I'm biased
Schmeichel could be in for Yashin too I think. Saved Denmark so many crucial times in the Euro 92 win, and was just a phenomenal goalkeeper.
Who in their right mind would take Pirlo over Iniesta
Would definitely have another centre-back in that team to partner Beckenbeaur. Put Di Stefano, Cryuff, and Maradona in a midfield 3 and have Pele up front instead of L. Ronaldo. Still too attacking but better than playing with a back three of one CB and two fullbacks. Also maybe Beckham instead of Messi. 
Actually, not one of those can be accused of having a short peak. I'd still have him near the top, mind, but it would be behind Pelé & Maradona and probably Puskas, Di Stefano, Platini & Zico.
Matthäus was head and shoulders above anyone you mentioned. It's not even particularly close tbh.
Just watch his 90 WC, he willed Germany to the title all by himself.
But could it survive an onslaught from Rory Delap throw ins at a wet and windy Tuesday night at the Britannia?
None of them touch Matthaus especially Vieira.
At his peak (which wasn't just one season), he was phenomenal
I've said it before, I think a lot of these older players are mostly judged on how they did at major tournaments. Not many outside their club teams country saw a lot of them on TV.
I only saw the tail end of his career, so I can't say how great he was at his peak. But he played for Germany for 20 years, 5 world cups, 3 finals, One winners medal and also won the European cup. Along with all he won at club level. He definitely deserves to be somewhere in the mix ahead of the likes of Keane, Scholes, Vieira and Makelele.
Are you OK?
Agreed
For sure. What about you?
I understand what you're saying, and I've posted the same argument myself, but then again winning titles are team-merits. So that's unfair for the likes of the other mentioned, that they simply wasn't born in a big World Cup winning country.
Not that he did it on the back of others, but did he lead Germany to the World Cup? (I simply don't know)
That's your opinion, it's not hard to not pick a player because someone else is better in his role. If we were just listing the best 11 players then Zidane would be in it, there wouldn't be any goalkeepers though.
And people should keep in mind that Zidane was an inconsistent player and has been criticized his entire career for it which is shown by his relatively modest club successes.
He was Germany's captain and best player in that WC, and won the Ballon d'Or that year.
That was his absolute peak, but his longevity at a world class level (both club and NT) was exceptional as well. Many have him as the third best German player of all time.
Would concede a few but score a lot more. Would be fun to watch.
They were all great players in their own right. But none had the longevity or success that Matthaus had. Had Roy Keane played for England or any other top country he probably would have been captain and he probably would have won some international trophies. If he was in that England midfield during the late 90s/early 2000 they might have won a world cup, he was so much better than the rest of what they had in that period.
But you don't spend 20 years at the very top for club and country without being an exceptional footballer, that's how I would look at it. He was considered the best player in the world in 1990/1991. Even at 38 in 1999 he was arguably one of the best on the pitch in that Champions League final, and taking him off is what cost Bayern their foothold in the game.
You can have many roles for the same slot in a 4-2-3-1 though. For instance, Zidane also played on the left in a 4-2-3-1 in Real Madrid, with freedom to start the playmaking from the back and get forward, with either Makelele and Conceicao or Makelele and Guti or Makelele and Helguera as centre midfielders.
I don't think that it was the best Zidane or even a consistent one. The problem with Zidane is that while he was excellent in different roles, when you consider all times selections, he is the best in none of them.You can have many roles for the same slot in a 4-2-3-1 though. For instance, Zidane also played on the left in a 4-2-3-1 in Real Madrid, with freedom to start the playmaking from the back and get forward, with either Makelele and Conceicao or Makelele and Guti or Makelele and Helguera as midfielders.
No. At Real Madrid, that was a role where Zidane was very consistent and very brilliant and where all his virtues shone.
Many of you guys probably don't know about this, but there was a big pressure from the press for Madrid to play with a diamond in midfield and have one extra attacker in the lineup, which only worked to some extent. This shouldn't come as a surprise because Benitez suffered similar pressure in 2016 to play James as an attacking midfielder instead of Casemiro, which he eventually did at some point.
I still remember Jorge D'Alessandro, Atletico fan and former player, having orgasms when describing the Zidane- Roberto Carlos society on the left and Figo on the right. It's normal, it allowed every player to give their best in a very stable formation because of the the massive attacking quality and the two centre midfielders giving balance.
Zidane wasn't very consistent for Real Madrid and Madrid weren't very consistent themselves between 2001 and 2007 though.
That's fair and I agree that 95% of these types of teams are a collection of names rather than a genuine system. With Zidane I'd still place him as superior to Ribery or Henry or Pires in an inside-left role, given it's where he did a lot of his best work for Real and France, and provided that there is overlapping width in place through a flank-dominating left-back and a forward who can work across the line as well as Henry does.
Depends what you're looking for elsewhere. There's a lot of interchangeability at full-back in particular with Bossis as another option too - and the same in midfield where Vieira has a more dynamic box-to-box game, whereas Deschamps is a more natural holder, while Giresse was much more attack-minded and played for Bordeaux as a 10. Although Giresse too makes a case for where 'shoe-horning' can work, given his right-hand man role next to Platini in 1984 as part of one of the greatest midfields of all time.
In 2002 Zidane was 30 years old, but he was good enough to stand out in a team full of world class players, candidates to the biggest individual awards. He obviously declined in his last years, but if you want to judge players when they are declining, which is fair because they are still footballers, I have a few questions for you:
a) Why don't you do the same for the rest of French players? b) How many French players had a big tournament where they dominated like Zidane had in 2006 at 34 years old? c) How did France cope without Zidane prior to 2006?
Not at all. No one in the history has been able to dictate the game the way Xavi did.
If you wanted to play the game, you could, but you mostly had to dance by his rhythm for 90 minutes.
Those are good points. But it illustrates my initial point, Zidane is arguable for France, one may argue in his favor but there is still an argument. Which is why I don't think that Zidane is actually an obvious first teamer in the best team of all time, I'm not even sure if he is in the second or third teams, because they have the likes of Cruijff, Best, Garincha, Figo or Eusebio in the attacking midfielder/winger category.
You are mistaken here, I'm not judging Zidane the player because he was great. I'm trying to find the best XI possible.
The compelling part about Matthäus, and the reason why he is held in such high esteem as a mainstay in a myriad All-Time XIs, is that he could do a bit of everything, and mastered different aspects of midfield play over his long and illustrious career. In a defensive sense, he was extremely dogged when the situation called for it and he got specific instructions from the coaches — for example, consider his man-making job on Maradona in the 1986 or 1990 World Cup finals, particularly the former as Diego was at the peak of his powers. From the heart of the pitch, he could pass and move...and dribble just about as well as any other central midfielder in football history, often like a hot knife through butter with regard to penetrative potential. His end-product as an offensive threat was substantial, even as a young player with Mönchengladbach — and overall, he boasted a comparable goals-per-game ratio in league matches to someone like Lampard (who is exalted for his productivity):
And of course, his mentality and grit and determination-to-win was supreme. As good as Keane was (favorite United player growing up for what it's worth), he didn't quite match Matthäus in terms of the comprehensiveness of his skill set. And of course, Makelélé was even more of a specialist at his pomp. Matthäus was very unique...a real one-man-army, like a more accomplished and long-lasting version of Robson (one of the few central midfielders to come close to him in terms of completeness of play).
Additionally, he is proven in what was the greatest and most intense league period in football history, late '80s to early '90s Serie A — which boosts his profile to a considerable degree. Just to sample Matthäus' competition, Milan had van Basten, Gullit, Baresi with Sacchi at the helm, Napoli had Maradona, Careca, Ferrera and so forth, even members of the non traditional-elite like Sampdoria, Hellas Verona or Fiorentina boasted the talents of Baggio, Mancini, Vialli, Elkjær, et cetera. And he delivered a title for Internazionale after a decade-long dry spell, while bearing the burden of being of their #10 (i.e. the primary inspiration in midfield and attack).
When you take wide-ranging talent and unending list of accomplishments into account, he trails only Beckenbauer and Gerd Müller for German footballers — which says something because they also produced Rummenigge, Breitner, Seeler, Walter, Sammer, Lahm and so forth.