No doubt a fantastic player, but isn’t there an argument he was playing in the best club and international sides ever, not trying to take away from him as he was a major factor in that but still it helps.
So where is Modric rated in best CM’s of all time ?
- Thread starter 432JuanMata
- Start date
Sure, but he himself heavily attributed to those sides being so dominant.
Even during the MSN treble season, Barcelona didn't dominate the midfield as they did with Xavi.
Probably harsh but certainly wasn’t one of the strengths of his game.
I don't really want to try and rank him amongst greats, I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough to try and attempt that.
However he's just top tier, still at this age. Not as consistent as before, but who would be at his age anyway? If you want to know how he's still doing it, here's 3 interesting things to watch carefully in my opinion: his body positioning, footwork, and split-stepping. He's just incredible in those and they go a long way to keep him playing like he is.
However he's just top tier, still at this age. Not as consistent as before, but who would be at his age anyway? If you want to know how he's still doing it, here's 3 interesting things to watch carefully in my opinion: his body positioning, footwork, and split-stepping. He's just incredible in those and they go a long way to keep him playing like he is.
Matthaus
Xavi
Modric
Iniesta
Gullit
Xavi
Modric
Iniesta
Gullit
I would add Pirlo to this great list.
Well above Xavi for me. That being said, the Xavi love in always baffled me. Overly risk averse (frequently refused to play killer passes and opted for ball retention at all costs) which he could get away with because of the quality of his teammates.
Put it this way, switch peak Xavi and peak Keane: Barca would be no worse whereas United... let's just say I'd love to see Xavi attempt to control a game playing in a midfield 2.
Put it this way, switch peak Xavi and peak Keane: Barca would be no worse whereas United... let's just say I'd love to see Xavi attempt to control a game playing in a midfield 2.
I think you need to retrace your steps for them to be right, if not righteous … Scholes had matchwinning performances against Barcelona twice, Milan, Inter, Juventus, Arsenal, Liverpool, Italy off the top of my head.
It’s easy to forget Xavi for a decade was a talent who didn’t quite blossomed at Barca and Spain, until the perfect storm of players made the possession football he and a group of other players one step ahead of everyone.
It’s easy to underestimate how even these players have developmental leaps and lulls, and that they also depend on being in a team with teammates who play to their strengths. Ask Pirlo and Xavi what they think of your evaluation if you get the chance.
Four of the most brilliant midfielders I’ve had the joy of watching in my life, all with their ups and downs.
I'd still have Xavi and Iniesta as the best of that extended generation. It's easy to say they might not have hit those heights in a different team but they were in that team and they did hit those heights. What happened counts for a lot more than what could have happened.
Beyond them though Modric is at least as good as and probably/certainly better than the other names being mentioned like Scholes, Pirlo, etc. Great player.
Beyond them though Modric is at least as good as and probably/certainly better than the other names being mentioned like Scholes, Pirlo, etc. Great player.
It’s a decent point though, if we’re honest Scholes did very little or next to nothing at international level whereas the other 3 excelled, Messi is still getting judged below Maradona for it for God’s sake..
If we group them together in a more generic ‘greatest midfielders’ then I’d say Modric, Xavi and Iniesta certainly top 3. And honestly you could have legitimate arguments for however you want to rank them.
What I’m most curious about though is what possible heights Modric could have reached if he ever had a coach like Guardiola.
Mourinho, Ancelotti, Benitez, Zidane, Solari…All their teams were much more reactionary, certainly compared to how Pep sets his teams up. We’ll never know but I’d wager that Modric would have reached another level playing for Pep.
What I’m most curious about though is what possible heights Modric could have reached if he ever had a coach like Guardiola.
Mourinho, Ancelotti, Benitez, Zidane, Solari…All their teams were much more reactionary, certainly compared to how Pep sets his teams up. We’ll never know but I’d wager that Modric would have reached another level playing for Pep.
Whether he is the best I'm not sure and Xavi probably edges it for me, in the last 20 years.
He is probably the most rounded of Xavi, Pirlo and himself though.
He's more mobile, wins balls, dribbles and can play it short, pick out a long ball and can score an important goal when needed. Superb player.
He is probably the most rounded of Xavi, Pirlo and himself though.
He's more mobile, wins balls, dribbles and can play it short, pick out a long ball and can score an important goal when needed. Superb player.
You mean winning 2 euros and a world cup in 4 years?
So did David Silva.
I still don't think he reaches matthaus levels but he's pretty darn close , I would put him a tier under the best of the best.
You couldn't find a worse name from that squad to make that stupid argument?
I think it’s a perfect name, great player and extremely important for Spain maybe more so than even Xavi (Spanish posters are free to correct me) but never won the club honours like Xavi, he’s not even mentioned in the discussion…You couldn't find a worse name from that squad to make that stupid argument?
Of course Barca would have been weaker, it is really not a question. Xavi is the embodiment of their style, literally the type of player that is 100% Barcelona DNA, more than even Iniesta and Messi.
Keane could do literally everything Xavi could do along with having greater athleticism, defensive positioning, goalscoring ability and aerial prowess. The only player in that Barca midfield who he couldn't easily replace was Iniesta. Which figures, because I rate Iniesta higher than Xavi anyway.
The fact that Xavi won the biggest honours for both his club and country while being the heartbeat of the system that enabled it both times is literally the reason why his name is considered among the very best. Bit weird to put someone who hasn't achieved those particular honours and then wonder why they aren't considered as good.
Nothing weird about it Xavi had Messi scoring or assisting 2-3 goals a game easy to look good in a successful team and David Silva was arguably more instrumental for Spain. Great midfielder don’t get me wrong but still benefited from the teams he played in..
Modric has to be in the conversation for greatest. Some you guys forgot more football than I know, but man this guy is just amazing.
There's no shot David Silva was more instrumental for Spain than Xavi.
I'm pretty sure 99% of Spanish fans would heavily disagree with that as well.
I'm pretty sure 99% of Spanish fans would heavily disagree with that as well.
As opposed to Modric who only had the number 1 goalscorer in the history of the sport to play with?
Most great players gain success in great teams and have a bunch of other greats around yet people continue to bash this stupid drum of bring benefitted by their teammates when they themselves had massive contributions to the said teams. These Messi v Ronaldo guys have been doing this for years.
Even In saying that Real were the underdog on the Barca/Real battle, as was Modric in the Croatia, Spurs and Zagreb sides, if you replace the two does Xavi shine as bright in a Croatia side?
Of course not. Xavi regularly gets name-checked as the greatest Spanish player of all time. Meanwhile Silva wasn't even a regular starter in their victorious World Cup campaign. They were light-years apart in terms of influence.
Still think
Tier 1
Xavi, Iniesta
Tier 2
Modric, Kroos, D.Silva
Tier 1
Xavi, Iniesta
Tier 2
Modric, Kroos, D.Silva
You mean the guy who lost his place to Pedro in 2010 WC after the horrible first match and only played again for a bit against Germany in SF?
May have made a mistake there was thinking on a different tournament.
You mean the guy who lost his place to Pedro in 2010 WC after the horrible first match and only played again for a bit against Germany in SF?
True, he was pretty good in euro 12, while xavi had pretty average tournament apart from the final. Still nowhere near as influential as Xavi or Iniesta though, even though he's cracking player, one of the best to play in PL.
A lot of talk about the longevity of Cristiano or Ibrahimovic but both of them are pretty lazy on the pitch and have clearly declined a lot. Modric, however, seems as good as ever at 36. I have never seen anything like it.
The reason Barca went into every game as the favourites was down to their ability of dominating any opposition on the ball with the midfield that revolved around Xavi and Iniesta. So it was them that was one of the primary reasons they weren't considered the underdogs. Being considered underdogs when you are the primary midfield playmaker, have another world class playmaker like Kroos next to you and have star studded team including an all time great isn't exactly a compliment for Modric.
On par with Matthaus and Xavi
No maybe not but his performances with Croatia and to play well enough in a Spurs side for Real Madrid to pick you up surely are.
Silva started games quite a lot in Euro 2008 and 2012 (tournaments where Xavi and Iniesta won the best player awards respectively), but he barely featured in the World Cup. He definitely wasn't more influential for Spain than Xavi. Cracking player though.
This is the problem for even a player as brilliant as Scholes. All the other people in the discussion had great international achievements to go along with their domestic success. We know Scholes wasn't appreciated or used properly by the England set up but unfortunately we can't use that as an excuse when ranking players at this extremely elite level. It"s unfair but that's the way it goes.
Tier 1: Xavi, Iniesta, Matthaus, Platini, Rijkaard
Tier 2: Modric, Kroos, Pirlo, Busquets, Valderrama, Hoddle
Tier 3: Scholes, Vieira, Keane, Xabi Alonso, Redondo, Guardiola, Robson
Tier 2: Modric, Kroos, Pirlo, Busquets, Valderrama, Hoddle
Tier 3: Scholes, Vieira, Keane, Xabi Alonso, Redondo, Guardiola, Robson
Keane was completely different player than Xavi and of course he could not influence games in the same way Xavi did. If Keane was that good, and if Scholes was that good, then how come they didn't dominate like Barcelona? That would only suggest that Ferguson was backwards thinking manager who didn't know how to use them, which I completely disagree with.
Xavi is comfortably better player, no comparison here really.
Would Modric have as many without Benzema and Ronaldo?
How did the Madrid midfield do in terms of bossing the game? I know Modric got a good assist but in terms of control and dominance?
Absolutely terrible. They were outplayed for the whole 120 mins, had no control, were pressed hard and pinned back from the get go. As expected neither Modric or Kroos pressed much at all.
Camavinga coming on helped a bit, as did Werner going off. They really should've lost the tie were it not for Benzema's finishing and Modric's (and Vinicius) passing. It's a shame because I can't see City making the same mistakes Chelsea did for some of the goals, a Chelsea - City tie up would've been far more interesting now that Reece James is back and they've binned Lukaku.