He's right though. Iniesta and Xavi were on another level. Never seen anybody make other world class midfielders look so helpless as those two did.
When he played for them.
Different eras though, you cant compare them. Put Souness in the modern game and he'd get tied in knots by players like Iniesta.
Any pitch that rolls the ball (not the bogs of the 80's), combined with a midfield unit that can pass and relay the ball (you've already given Xavi Iniesta, might as well add Busquets), and a referee calling a fair game and that midfield would give anyone a game, and if they're not careful, the runaround.
Modric played in numerous positions from AM, to LAM to proactive/attacking CM to being box-to-box and, apart from goals, displayed the nuance of each role. He could be deployed in a number positions or with different job briefs and execute them with aplomb. In this way he's more like Iniesta than Xavi.
Probably badly, considering the UCL semis of 2010 against Inter.
Matthäus retired at age 39 and Modric turns 37 this year. Hardly a difference there.
To be fair though Modric has played 8 straight years with Toni Kroos, who is one of the best passers I've ever seen in terms of variety and weight of passes. Where Kroos falls behind Modric and Xavi is in his close control and agility, which is fine but not great, but they're on another level to him for that. You can point to Croatia then instead of Spain, but Rakitic is another fine player, and the likes of Brozovic, Kovacic and others know how to play. It's not as if Modric is playing with a load of hackers, he's playing with alongside good ball-playing midfielders too.
About half of that list isn’t fit to lace his boots. The likes of Lampard and Gerrard are very far from his level.
Depends on what you need, really — and comparing Xavi with Matthäus is a bit odd, just like you won't compare Xavi with Pelé or Beckenbauer, their roles were so different. Xavi is the GOAT conductor/playmaker from central midfield; Matthäus was never quite capable of that — but he would dominate everything and everyone in midfield with his physicality & engine as well as scoring an odd 20 goals per season; Rijkaard was probably the most all-rounded midfielder of all-time (in his younger Ajax days you can see that he was very comfortable even as an attacking midfielder behind van Basten), although he couldn't score as much as Matthäus or control the game as well as Xavi (although defensively he was better than both).
Do you reckon he's better than Redondo at their respective peaks?
Zidane and Seedorf ?
Modric is way above Seedorf imo and Zidane was more attacking midfielder than central midfielder.
RE Seedorf different players I know but I love him.
There's no denying Modric has played with some good midfielders, but with Xavi, you can arguably claim the greatest triumvirate a midfield has had, or, best in their roles at what they did - specifically as specialists - that there has been. Busquets is in any conversation for one-touch, progressive play and chain passing with anyone, from the loftiest names to other lesser known specialists, and Iniesta is probably the most praised of the three, interestingly enough, all of which, some use to reduce Xavi's brilliance or dilute it down. This despite him being the one least able to be replicated in another i.e. the gold standard and pinnacle of knitting a midfield/team together.
Aye, Seedorf was brilliant to watch when he was on song. Superb player with a glittering CV, but I felt that he was never quite as influential and consistent as he should have been given his talent and athleticism. Agreed that Modric's longevity sets him apart from all their other CMs, at least in the modern era.
I'm pretty sure 90% of the football fanbase would take modric over any of those 3 players. And let's be honest with ourselves here modric is levels above Scholes aswell and has proven it at every level.
He gets more praise than Gerrard and Lampard he literally won the Ballon d’or, do people have a book of cliches ready to bring out that simply isn’t close to reality
If we remove some premier league bias and look at it realistically, only Xavi and Iniesta can be mentioned in the same tier as him. Literally any barometer. Team success. National team success. Individual accolades. Big trophies won. The ability he has. Variety to his game. Level of perfection in the qualities he brings to the game. He has it all as a midfielder and in the modern era, he's right up there with Xavi, Iniesta, Zidane. Hell, Iniesta and Zidane are more attacking than him anyway but he is capable of doing either role which those 2 weren't.
What he did do was do brilliantly in the latter stages of the CL and dominated the world Cup. At the end of the day, if you have a decent season but then explode when it really matters, you deserve to win it IMO. That's what really counts and what will be remembered anyway.
Or at least they should...but EPL fans are a funny bunch
No Xavi is the better passer no question.
He could wallop a ball, that's for sure.