Top 10 greatest players of all time

[RVN1991]

Messi
Pele
Cristiano
Maradona
Beckenbauer
Cruyff
Ronaldo
Di Stefano
Zidane
Ronaldinho/Best/Platini/Puskas

 

[giorno]

Julien Faubert
Royston Drenthe
Thomas Gravesen
Stig Toefting
Vinnie Jones
Carlos Kaiser
Thomas Strunz
Jan Vennegoor of Hesselink
Magico Gonzalez
Tomás "El trinche" Carlovich

 

[devaneios]

Julien Faubert
Royston Drenthe
Thomas Gravesen
Stig Toefting
Vinnie Jones
Carlos Kaiser
Thomas Strunz
Jan Vennegoor of Hesselink
Magico Gonzalez
Tomás "El trinche" Carlovich

Mágico Gonzalez doesn't belong to that list; he was very inconsistent, like many other high regarded players, but was legitimately great on his day.

 

[giorno]

Mágico Gonzalez doesn't belong to that list; he was very inconsistent, like many other high regarded players, but was legitimately great on his day.

I know. He's in my top 10 all time for a reason

 

[General_Elegancia]

Cruyff as a libero. In fact, in 1977/1978 season he played a lot as a sweeper. It showed his all-roundness.

 

[Gehrman]

Mágico Gonzalez doesn't belong to that list; he was very inconsistent, like many other high regarded players, but was legitimately great on his day.

I take it the list is more about top 10 shit hardmen.

 

[Gehrman]

Cruyff as a libero. In fact, in 1977/1978 season he played a lot as a sweeper a lot of games. It showed his all-roundness.

Also shows that breaking down his ability to his g/a ratio doesnt make sense for someone who was iconic for being a total footballer.

 

[devaneios]

I take it the list is more about top 10 shit hardmen.

I know; that's the reason for my post.

 

[giorno]

I take it the list is more about top 10 shit hardmen.

No, it's a streets will never forget list

I don't even think Carlovich ever played top flight football, but he authored the most legendary 45 minutes of football in argentina's history by someone not named Diego Armando Maradona

'Course, these days I doubt he's still considered Rosario's best ever

 

[Reij]

I think tiers are better in these situations.

Tier 1 ~ Messi, Maradona and Pele

Tier 2~ Cristiano Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Zidane, Ronaldo, Cruyff, Beckenbauer, Platini, probably Neuer too

Tier 3 ~ Marco van Basten, Matthaus, Neymar, Kaka, G. Muller, Suarez, Lewandowski, Xavi, Iniesta, Buffon, Modric, Pirlo, Kroos, Robben, etc

 

[giorno]

I think tiers are better in these situations.

Tier 1 ~ Messi, Maradona and Pele

Tier 2~ Cristiano Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Zidane, Ronaldo, Cruyff, Beckenbauer, Platini, probably Neuer too

Tier 3 ~ Marco van Basten, Matthaus, Neymar, Kaka, G. Muller, Suarez, Lewandowski, Xavi, Iniesta, Buffon, Modric, Pirlo, Kroos, Robben, etc

Yeah Zidane and Ronaldinho a tier above Van Basten is a crime

 

[Gehrman]

Yeah Zidane and Ronaldinho a tier above Van Basten is a crime

Its interesting to see a Real Madrid fan think Zidane is overrated. I would agree though. His peak performances were awesome, but his consistency was below a lot other greats. Like Platini

 

[RedRJ]

Messi
Pele
Cristiano
Maradona
Beckenbauer
Cruyff
Ronaldo
Di Stefano
Zidane
Ronaldinho/Best/Platini/Puskas

Hard to disagree with any of these.

 

[giorno]

Its interesting to see a Real Madrid fan think Zidane is overrated. I would agree though. His peak performances were awesome, but his consistency was below a lot other greats. Like Platini

Zidane is not overrated. Van Basten is being hilariously underrated. Van Basten has a strong case for being top 10 all time

Platini was better than Zidane

 

[Alpha 1]

Zidane is not overrated. Van Basten is being hilariously underrated. Van Basten has a strong case for being top 10 all time

Platini was better than Zidane

Zidane was very elegant to watch but he was also very inconsistent. For me, not top 10 and I'd put Iniesta above him.

For the greatest list in my opinion:
1. Messi: Has among the highest ever peaks (only equalled by Maradona at Mexico 86), longevity (only equalled by Cristiano), the highest number of individual and team trophies, and amongst the greatest goalscorers ever.
2. Pele: The Messi of his day; so see above.
3. Maradona: Mexico 86 will never be equalled. Among the highest peaks both at Mexico 86 and with Napoli.
4. Di Stefano
5. Cristiano: longevity, success, goals. Done well to be compared to a true freak of nature.
6. Cruyff
6. Backenbauer
8. R9: Would have been top 4 had it not been for career threatening injuries. Slightly overrated by some due to " what could have been" and nostalgia.
9. Platini: Did well to be compared to a true freak of nature I.e Maradona
10. Eusebio: Also did well to be compared to a freak of nature I.e Pele

 

[giorno]

Zidane was very elegant to watch but he was also very inconsistent. For me, not top 10 and I'd put Iniesta above him.

Ah, the myth of Zidane being inconsistent....

Iniesta over Zidane sounds absurd to me. Xavi, I could understand, Iniesta is absurd

 

[devaneios]

Iniesta over Zidane sounds absurd to me.

Why?

Iniesta is on par with Zidane in both skills and achievements. At least as good dribbler and passer; a worse goal threat(it's not like Zidane was a big one either), but with much more workrate. Tons of great matches and clutch moments at the highest level, be it UCL playoffs, WC, Euro, El Clássicos, etc.

I wouldn't affirm he is above, but definitely it isn't absurd.

 

[giorno]

Why?

Iniesta is on par with Zidane in both skills and achievements. At least as good dribbler and passer; a worse goal threat(it's not like Zidane was a big one either), but with much more workrate. Tons of great matches and clutch moments at the highest level, be it UCL playoffs, WC, Euro, El Clássicos, etc.

I wouldn't affirm he is above, but definitely it isn't absurd.

Because Iniesta spent most of his career being the 3rd or 5th best player on his teams. Arguably he was Spain's second best in '10 and '12 but in '10 David Villa turned out to be Spain's actual second best player and '12 was the least impressive of Spain's wins

He never lead a team.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

Because Iniesta spent most of his career being the 3rd or 5th best player on his teams. Arguably he was Spain's second best in '10 and '12 but in '10 David Villa turned out to be Spain's actual second best player and '12 was the least impressive of Spain's wins

He never lead a team.

Tbf, he also played on much better teams than Zidane did and he spent his entire club/NT career with a midfielder who was better than him.

I think Zidane's a better player if your team needs a talisman to lead/inspire the team. He's got more 'panache' for that role than Iniesta.

On teams that don't need a central talismanic figure, I think I'd pick Iniesta over Zidane.

Personally think it's close between the two. If I was forced to pick one, I'd pick Zidane, but I'm biased because he's one of my favorite players ever. I do think people overrate him though in these all-time lists when people put him in the top 5.

 

[devaneios]

Because Iniesta spent most of his career being the 3rd or 5th best player on his teams. Arguably he was Spain's second best in '10 and '12 but in '10 David Villa turned out to be Spain's actual second best player and '12 was the least impressive of Spain's wins

He never lead a team.

This kind of argument is complicated because they didn't have the same partners; Zidane never had someone like Messi, who took over the lead role in final third creation most of the time, or another all time great midfielder to split time on the ball with(teammates of this strain helped him to win a lot of trophies, of course; but on the other hand he had to share the protagonism). Furthermore, a player being the big star of a team doesn't mean that he was the best player in all the big moments. Iniesta was better than Messi in many big games; also, I think he and Xavi were very very close; I wouldn't assert that he was always second to Xavi(in fact, I'd put him above from 2010/2011 onwards, which includes UCL11 and Euro 12, obviously).

 

[Swoobs]

Zidane was very elegant to watch but he was also very inconsistent. For me, not top 10 and I'd put Iniesta above him.

For the greatest list in my opinion:
1. Messi: Has among the highest ever peaks (only equalled by Maradona at Mexico 86), longevity (only equalled by Cristiano), the highest number of individual and team trophies, and amongst the greatest goalscorers ever.
2. Pele: The Messi of his day; so see above.
3. Maradona: Mexico 86 will never be equalled. Among the highest peaks both at Mexico 86 and with Napoli.
4. Di Stefano
5. Cristiano: longevity, success, goals. Done well to be compared to a true freak of nature.
6. Cruyff
6. Backenbauer
8. R9: Would have been top 4 had it not been for career threatening injuries. Slightly overrated by some due to " what could have been" and nostalgia.
9. Platini: Did well to be compared to a true freak of nature I.e Maradona
10. Eusebio: Also did well to be compared to a freak of nature I.e Pele

Would put Beckenbauer in 4th, ahead of Di Stefano, agreed with the rest of the order until Eusebio because I think Muller is better in terms of achievements.

So:
Messi
Pele
Maradona
Beckenbaur
Di Stefano
Cristiano
Cruyff
R9
Platini
Muller

 

[giorno]

@Eddy_JukeZ @devaneios I acknowledge I may not be entirely fair about judging Iniesta, but that's how it is for me. Not his "fault", sure, and Zidane also got to enjoy having a better teammate drawing more attention a couple times, but ultimately i just kind of tend to value floor raising players more at the end, i guess

 

[giorno]

This kind of argument is complicated because they didn't have the same partners; Zidane never had someone like Messi, who took over the lead role in final third creation most of the time, or another all time great midfielder to split time on the ball with(teammates of this strain helped him to win a lot of trophies, of course; but on the other hand he had to share the protagonism). Furthermore, a player being the big star of a team doesn't mean that he was the best player in all the big moments. Iniesta was better than Messi in many big games; also, I think he and Xavi were very very close; I wouldn't assert that he was always second to Xavi(in fact, I'd put him above from 2010/2011 onwards, which includes UCL11 and Euro 12, obviously).

Absolutely not. There's a reason Spain's fortunes matched Xavi's, not Iniesta's, and when his level dropped Barcelona's answer was Neymar and Suarez, not greater role for Iniesta. Even at euro 2012 in which Iniesta was Spain's best performer arguably(and he probably was all in all), it was still Xavi who ran the show.

 

[Gehrman]

This kind of argument is complicated because they didn't have the same partners; Zidane never had someone like Messi, who took over the lead role in final third creation most of the time, or another all time great midfielder to split time on the ball with(teammates of this strain helped him to win a lot of trophies, of course; but on the other hand he had to share the protagonism). Furthermore, a player being the big star of a team doesn't mean that he was the best player in all the big moments. Iniesta was better than Messi in many big games; also, I think he and Xavi were very very close; I wouldn't assert that he was always second to Xavi(in fact, I'd put him above from 2010/2011 onwards, which includes UCL11 and Euro 12, obviously).

I dont doubt Iniesta was better than Messi in many big games, however im not really sure that means that Messi wasnt better in most big games. Apart from the fact that Messi is so much than just goals, doesnt he have the most goals in finals than any player in history? And he was electric in the classico´s untill he turned 32.

Anyway, Messi has 35 goals and 15 assists in 48 apps(cup finals).

 

[devaneios]

I dont doubt Iniesta was better than Messi in many big games, however im not really sure that means that Messi wasnt better in most big games. Apart from the fact that Messi is so much than just goals, doesnt he have the most goals in finals than any player in history? And he was electric in the classico´s untill he turned 32.

Anyway, Messi has 35 goals and 15 assists in 48 apps.

I agree that Messi was better in most of the games both played together; however, if you stick to the most important games(UCL playoffs against other big clubs, El Clássicos, etc), I'd say it's much closer, almost split; moreover, it's way easier to recognize and remember a great Messi performance, for obvious reasons.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Absolutely not. There's a reason Spain's fortunes matched Xavi's, not Iniesta's, and when his level dropped Barcelona's answer was Neymar and Suarez, not greater role for Iniesta. Even at euro 2012 in which Iniesta was Spain's best performer arguably(and he probably was all in all), it was still Xavi who ran the show.

He ran the show as a midfield playmaker, but his role wasn’t any more important than Iniesta who did a bit of everything playmake, penetrate with dribbles, and scored.

 

[giorno]

He ran the show as a midfield playmaker, but his role wasn’t any more important than Iniesta who did a bit of everything playmake, penetrate with dribbles, and scored.

Xavi was the engine that made the whole thing work. He was THE team. Without him, Spain were no different from any other side. Which, well, we actually saw that for a fact

 

[meninred]

It is almost an impossible task as it is very subjective. You have to consider many variables. It definitely needs research stats and votes.

Possible Ten candidates

Yashin
Pele
Cruyff
Backebauer
Platini
Maradona
Ronaldo lima
Zidane
Messi
C Ronaldo

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

@Eddy_JukeZ I acknowledge I may not be entirely fair about judging Iniesta, but that's how it is for me. Not his "fault", sure, and Zidane also got to enjoy having a better teammate drawing more attention a couple times, but ultimately i just kind of tend to value floor raising players more at the end, i guess

Fair enough. I think I prefer ceiling raising players more than floor raising players, but it's certainly an interesting debate in general.

I had a similar argument with a poster on how I'd prefer Xavi in my team over Ronaldinho despite Ronaldinho being a more gifted player individually.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Tbf, he also played on much better teams than Zidane did and he spent his entire club/NT career with a midfielder who was better than him.

I think Zidane's a better player if your team needs a talisman to lead/inspire the team. He's got more 'panache' for that role than Iniesta.

On teams that don't need a central talismanic figure, I think I'd pick Iniesta over Zidane.

Personally think it's close between the two. If I was forced to pick one, I'd pick Zidane, but I'm biased because he's one of my favorite players ever. I do think people overrate him though in these all-time lists when people put him in the top 5.

Better team yes, but Zidane has also play alongside with some of the very best player in the game to be fair - L.Ronado, Figo, Henry etc

 

[Alpha 1]

I agree that Messi was better in most of the games both played together; however, if you stick to the most important games(UCL playoffs against other big clubs, El Clássicos, etc), I'd say it's much closer, almost split; moreover, it's way easier to recognize and remember a great Messi performance, for obvious reasons.

Firstly UCL playoffs against other big clubs? When did Barcelona play in the playoffs? Unless you mean the knockouts?

Secondly you need to elaborate what you mean by almost split. No doubt Iniesta had some great performances but there are few in which he actually outshone Messi. The ones which comes to mind is the final in 2009. That's it. When they were teammates, Messi was easily the best player on the pitch vs Arsenal in 2010 and 2011, vs Bayern in 2015. Vs Chelsea in 2018, vs ourselves in 2008 and 2011, vs Real Madrid in 2011 and in most el clasicos.

Tbf, he also played on much better teams than Zidane did and he spent his entire club/NT career with a midfielder who was better than him.

I think Zidane's a better player if your team needs a talisman to lead/inspire the team. He's got more 'panache' for that role than Iniesta.

On teams that don't need a central talismanic figure, I think I'd pick Iniesta over Zidane.

Personally think it's close between the two. If I was forced to pick one, I'd pick Zidane, but I'm biased because he's one of my favorite players ever. I do think people overrate him though in these all-time lists when people put him in the top 5.

Imo it's hard to separate them in the big games. Both produced similarly big moments and big performances on the big occasion.

Iniesta was more consistent in the " bread and butter games" but played in the shadow of Messi so getting recognition wasn't easy. Zidane played with some great players but none of Messi's calibre. Henry was not the same player for France as he was with Arsenal mainly because of his role as a conventional CF with his country. R9 wasn't the player he once was by the time he joined Real Madrid.

Zidane, however, was a bigger personality and a leader which iniesta wasn't.

 

[Son]

No1 Pele. His record combining club and international football is unmatched.
No2 George Best. Best actual footballer ever.
No3 Diego Maradona - put in Messi like performances whilst having the crap kicked out of him on the pitch and snorting loads of crap off it.

Pele was never in the same league as Messi as a footballer.

Both Maradona and Messi did far more impressive things than Pele ever did in his career. He won all his trophies playing for stacked sides against inferior players and teams.

He had too many luxuries all through his career and wasn’t a genius like Messi or Maradona.

The fact he did arguably his greatest moments at 17 shows probably how poor the game was back then. In reality a 17 year old Pele was a million miles from a prime Maradona or Messi. They both would have destroyed him on a football pitch at any point skill wise and IQ wise.

Maradona especially didn’t have the luxury of taking on nothing sides most weeks either.

 

[devaneios]

Firstly UCL playoffs against other big clubs? When did Barcelona play in the playoffs? Unless you mean the knockouts?

Yeah, I made a mistake.

Secondly you need to elaborate what you mean by almost split. No doubt Iniesta had some great performances but there are few in which he actually outshone Messi. The ones which comes to mind is the final in 2009. That's it. When they were teammates, Messi was easily the best player on the pitch vs Arsenal in 2010 and 2011, vs Bayern in 2015. Vs Chelsea in 2018, vs ourselves in 2008 and 2011, vs Real Madrid in 2011 and in most el clasicos.
Imo it's hard to separate them in the big games. Both produced similarly big moments and big performances on the big occasion.

Iniesta was better against Chelsea in 2009, 2012(in both legs) and in the first leg in 2018; better against PSG in 2015; and, as I said, better in the 2011 and 2015 finals in my opinion(which you apparently disagree with). Also, Iniesta was very good against Arsenal in 2011, so I'm not sure if he was worse than Messi.

Iniesta was very very good in El Clásicos; I don't remember him being outperformed too many times by Messi(2007, 2011 and 2017 are the matches I remember Messi being clearly better).

 

[Gehrman]

Pele was never in the same league as Messi as a footballer.

Both Maradona and Messi did far more impressive things than Pele ever did in his career. He won all his trophies playing for stacked sides against inferior players and teams.

He had too many luxuries all through his career and wasn’t a genius like Messi or Maradona.

The fact he did arguably his greatest moments at 17 shows probably how poor the game was back then. In reality a 17 year old Pele was a million miles from a prime Maradona or Messi. They both would have destroyed him on a football pitch at any point skill wise and IQ wise.

Maradona especially didn’t have the luxury of taking on nothing sides most weeks either.

Pelé showed up agaisnt just about anyone whenever he got the chance. Id agree that the standards of football were far lower back in the 60´s, but its hard extrapolate to today. He nutmegged Beckenbaur and put him on his arse. Every legend from that era was in awe of Pelé.

 

[paulscholes18]

1 Eusebio
2 Messi
3 C. Ronaldo
4 Best
5 Beckenbauer
6 Maradona
7 Pele
8 Matthaus
9 Fat Ronaldo
10 Zidane

 

[Alpha 1]

Yeah, I made a mistake.


Iniesta was better against Chelsea in 2009, 2012(in both legs) and in the first leg in 2018; better against PSG in 2015; and, as I said, better in the 2011 and 2015 finals in my opinion(which you apparently disagree with). Also, Iniesta was very good against Arsenal in 2011, so I'm not sure if he was worse than Messi.

Iniesta was very very good in El Clásicos; I don't remember him being outperformed too many times by Messi(2007, 2011 and 2017 are the matches I remember Messi being clearly better).

That performance vs ourselves in 2011 was an all time performance. No one on that pitch was at Messi’s level. The 2015 final lacked a truly outstanding performance so opinions will vary.

I agree with the Chelsea matches of 2009 and 2012. Partly that can be explained by them planning specifically to nullify Messi.; see Essien's interview on Rio's podcast but no excuses, iniesta outshone him. The PSG game at home, again not much in it but iniesta was better.

So if you consider big ucl games, iniesta was better in 2009 semifinal away vs Chelsea, 2009 final vs United, 2012 semifinal home and away vs Chelsea, and vs psg home in 2015; total of 5 matches.
Messi was better in 2010 and 2011 home and away vs Arsenal, 2011 home and away vs Real, 2011 final, 2013 home vs Ac Milan, 2015 home and away vs Bayern, 2015 away vs PSG, 2015 home and away vs City, 2017 away vs Juventus, 2018 home vs Chelsea; total of 15 big matches.

In elclasicos, Messi was better in most of them examples 2005/6 away, 2006/7 away, 2007/8 away, 2009/10 home, 2010/11 home, 2011/12 home, 2013/14 away, 2016/17 home, 2017/18 home. Infact I don't remember a single clasico where Iniesta was better although he has given some very good performances.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Pele was never in the same league as Messi as a footballer.

Both Maradona and Messi did far more impressive things than Pele ever did in his career. He won all his trophies playing for stacked sides against inferior players and teams.

He had too many luxuries all through his career and wasn’t a genius like Messi or Maradona.

The fact he did arguably his greatest moments at 17 shows probably how poor the game was back then. In reality a 17 year old Pele was a million miles from a prime Maradona or Messi. They both would have destroyed him on a football pitch at any point skill wise and IQ wise.

Maradona especially didn’t have the luxury of taking on nothing sides most weeks either.

Such a terrible take, nonsense really.

 

[giorno]

R9 wasn't the player he once was by the time he joined Real Madrid.

Ronaldo in 02/03 and doped-to-his-eyeballs Del Piero in 97/98 were the only two teammates Zidane had who were unquestionably better than him. Henry should have been in 2004 and 2006 but he wasn't

 

[Superden]

Pele was never in the same league as Messi as a footballer.

Both Maradona and Messi did far more impressive things than Pele ever did in his career. He won all his trophies playing for stacked sides against inferior players and teams.

He had too many luxuries all through his career and wasn’t a genius like Messi or Maradona.

The fact he did arguably his greatest moments at 17 shows probably how poor the game was back then. In reality a 17 year old Pele was a million miles from a prime Maradona or Messi. They both would have destroyed him on a football pitch at any point skill wise and IQ wise.

Maradona especially didn’t have the luxury of taking on nothing sides most weeks either.

How can you say he played for stacked sides and then use that as an argument against him when comparing to messi?..

 

[Demyanenko_square_jaw]

Pele was never in the same league as Messi as a footballer.

Both Maradona and Messi did far more impressive things than Pele ever did in his career. He won all his trophies playing for stacked sides against inferior players and teams.

He had too many luxuries all through his career and wasn’t a genius like Messi or Maradona.

The fact he did arguably his greatest moments at 17 shows probably how poor the game was back then. In reality a 17 year old Pele was a million miles from a prime Maradona or Messi. They both would have destroyed him on a football pitch at any point skill wise and IQ wise.

Maradona especially didn’t have the luxury of taking on nothing sides most weeks either.

Don't you notice the contradiction in saying he won everything playing for stacked teams, then going on to suggest Brazilian football was mostly "nothing sides". His teams were 95% domestic talent based. Brazilian league structure could have been better, but the talent in the bigger state championships was deep.