He played 40 games and scored 14 goals, given the context of his career it's not a small sample size. Its not as if he played 1000 games like Messi and Ronaldo. He won 1 league title and no champions leagues, at a certain point saying "I watched him and he was great" has to be backed up with something, otherwise it just looks like nostalgia
Would Ronaldo have been so adored if he played football in this current era
- Thread starter Sir Erik ten Hag
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
Where did Barca finish when Maradona joined them? Why is that even a good argument? How many European cups and leagues did United win under Robson in comparison to Keane, are both players not comparable?
The Ronaldo at Madrid had gone through 2 or 3 career ending injuries also btw.
Maradona has his time in napoli to point to as actually improving a team. Neither of those players were ever talked about in the GOAT category, if you're going to do that and base it off 2 seasons, you'd expect that they might have helped their team with something or set all time scoring records, particularly plating as a tradional striker rather than winger or false 9 like messi and Ronaldo did
He'd be adored. He smashed goasl for fun.
He won the Dutch Cup at 19 with PSV, then joined Barca the following year and won the Copa Del Rey and UEFA Cup with them.
And lost the league, which they won the season after he left. If we're counting achievements in the Dutch league then fair enough. I'm most saying he wasn't a great player, but if you're going to try and argue that a striker is better than two other attackers based off of two seasons, his best of which was bettered statistically 6 and 7 times respectively by those players, who each hav about 15 years worth of top seasons compared to 2, you'd need that player to have made some ridiculous achievements in those two seasons, instead of no league titles, and only finishing top scorer once
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
There talked about GOATS of united but using your logic they can't be compared or people can't see Robson to be better, because Keane won more...
I think that we are arguing different points here. I'm not comparing him to Messi or R9, I'm saying that he is a level above the strikers out there now, he was unique in that he could do pretty much everything excellently.
No, but if by every metric Keane was a better player, and for attackers that does primarily mean goals and to a lesser extent assists, you'd really need to have had a huge effect to have two great seasons ranked over players with 15 great seasons, most of which were better statistically.
Right, but a lot of the players within the last decade have suffered because they've had to play at the same time as Messi and Ronaldo, no ballon d'ors, no golden boots etc. If Ronaldo was playing in this era he'd similarly be judged by the fact that even his best seasons weren't even close to those 2
Plus two Copa America's and two World cups, almost single handily dragging Brazil to the title in 2002, still one of the modern day greats
While that's technically true, I don't know if including a world cup where he played 0 minutes among his trophy haul does anything to prove his greatness
Barca's points tally in the Ronaldo season was 10 & 16 pts higher than the 2 seasons either side, for what it's worth, along with approx 30 more goals over both seasons. They finished on 90pts, just 2 off Madrid who won the league. Context matters. He was 20 at the time, by the way.
You're simply going on stats, very few players in any era have had seasons like Ronaldo at Barcelona or Inter, he was a number 9 who could drop deep and carry the ball 60 yards, dribble past 4-5 players, had skills and touch associated with wide players and midfielders, one of the strongest players would ever see and one of the fastest to and he combined this otherworldly ability with actually being productive 47 goals in 49 games, even with Messi and Ronaldo around he would stand out, undoubtedly.
He doesn't know much about context.
Wasn't the season he was there a 42 game season, and the season they won a 38 game season. Also it doesn't take into account the strength of the league in both seasons, if Madrid and Barca both dropped a lot more points you'd imagine the league was stronger
He'd stand out but he'd clearly be behind them, he'd be the best of the rest, right now he benefits from nostalgia and not playing in the same era as those two
Indeed, context is everything in most discussions...While that's technically true, I don't know if including a world cup where he played 0 minutes among his trophy haul does anything to prove his greatness
He wouldn't because people watch football with their eyes, you've never had to be always the most productive player in the world to necessarily be the best in the world
If they still did the 'Bidone d'Oro' and it was Europe-wide, he would've recategorised Ballon D'or challengers such as Van Disney!
The guy was a phenom. Often in the wrong place at the wrong time career-wise.
The guy was a phenom. Often in the wrong place at the wrong time career-wise.
Part of his charm today is that he no longer plays. It adds to his legendary status. But if he's still playing now? he'd be known as both a top top player and at the same time, a traitor who switches between rivaling clubs.
he got subbed after an hour in the first game because of injury and didn’t play in the return leg at all
You do when two other players, who were also the top 2 assisters were playing at the same time and scoring 60 and 70 goals in a season. And doing this sort of thing consistently over years, and doing it in the champions league. A striker who was a fair bit behind those two wouldn't be considered on their level
I mean if your injuries stopped you playing in the champions league and your hype was based off running past defenders in la liga, it might be fair to ask some questions
Are you the bitter one?
The guy was sensational and very easy to warm to. He was like an overgrown kid living the dream and enjoying every minute of it.
Old Trafford gave him a standing ovation after he single-handedly ended our CL aspirations in what was otherwise a very close contest. Wrap your head around that.
You are comparing two different eras and assuming Ronaldo couldn't keep pace with C.Ronaldo and Messi in today's game. Even Suarez and Lewandowski surpassed Ronaldo's tally in recent years.
In a hypothetical discussion like this, you can't just take 90s Ronaldo and expect his results to be the same in this era. His numbers would clearly improve.
It sounds obvious but it would come down to his consistency. If he avoids injuries and could maintain his fitness over a few seasons straight, then yes, he would be seen at the same level, maybe even higher than Cristiano at least. The biggest difference now would be that whoever snaps him up at 18 or early '20s, would treat him in a way no one was in the '90s. He would be given all the help needed physically as well as a much higher level of protection from refs. In the age of social media and super clubs, he would play for a team that dominates it's domestic league surrounded by a higher concentration of best in class players and will have a shot at the CL around 7 or 8 seasons out of 10. The rest would depend on his own discipline and dedication but if he has that, Cristiano Ronaldo would have nothing above him and the only thing Messi would probably have above him is his playmaking ability.
Even his best seasons weren't comparable to Messi and ronaldo's best. He'd need to up his game a fair bit and keep it consistent
I mean he only finished with the golden boot once in his own era, so it's hard to say that he would have kept pace with them.
Good point, some players have a habit of doing that. Roberto Baggio played for Juve at his peak while Milan were winning everything, finally moved to Milan for trophies and Juve started getting them. Then Inter, Bologna, Brescia... Never won the Champions League.
Roberto Baggio ladies and gents, he was shite too.
His best seasons never came at a time where the domestic league dynamic was what it is today. The teams that Messi and CR played for and excelled were much more set up tp dominate domestically than any team Ronaldo played for. Not to mention that he never had the advantage of few seasons injury free in a settled enviroment where a CL 1/4 appearance is almost guaranteed.
Another major difference is the how cagey and defense oriented tactics were in the '90s especially in Serie A compared to La Liga in the '10s. Since Pep's Barcelona, football and in particular La Liga has not been as open in a very long time. Go back to CL games and in particular Seria in the '90s and the onus was defensive structure and organisation. I mean the Italian reputation is there for a reason. Talent always stands out and is a constant, but stats are highly reliant on so many variables.
Last edited:
Well In the season he was at Barca here's the top 5
Real Madrid 92 points
Barca 90 points
Deportivo 77points
Betis 77 points
Atletico 71 points
And here's the season Barca won the treble with MSN and ronadlo scored 48 league goals, more than Brazilian ronaldo's best total overall
Barca 94 points
Real 92 points
Atletico 78 points
Valencia 77 points
Sevilla 76 points,
I'm not seeing the domestic dominance difference, perhaps you could point it out, but it looks like there were more teams closer to Real and Barca in 14/15 than the season Brazilian Ronaldo played there
Yep good post.
You are taking one season! The dominance comes from a period of 5 to 10 years straight where a title challenge and a 1/4 final CL spot is more or less taken for granted. Also when you say more than Ronaldo's best total overall, you mean by one goal? He scored 47 goals in the one season he played for Barcelona.
Yes, Cristiano scored 48 league goals that season. Ronaldo scored 47 overall. And judging by the tables there was a similar level in difference between real and Barca and the rest of the league.
I can only look at the one season Ronaldo was at Barca, because that's the only one that matters in terms of how strong those clubs were compared to the rest of the sides.
Now do the goal differences in those seasons.
My point is playing for a team that is consistently dominant for a decade alongside a higher concentration of best players in the world and a setup designed to extract the maximum from these resources ensuring a league and CL challenge over that period will definitely be a big factor is having higher stats. Look at Suarez stats for Barcelona or Lewandowski's for Milan. I am sure Haaland will have higher stats for Man City too while we're at it. It's a setup that greatly helps in that regard.
Ronaldo played one year in a good Barcelona side, a few years for an Inter side that were playing a much more cagey league with competitors who were at least as good. They did not stand out or were the main attraction for the best players by any means. They were not set up to dominate their domestic league. Then he went to Real when he was past his best after so many injuries and if you remember that Real side was used as an example of how just buying the best players don't buy you success with how chaotic it was built. He really never had a single season aided by the advantages, Messi, CR or Lewandowski have been having and you could argue that a part of it is his own career choices, although, I can't remember any team back then doing what these super clubs are doing now.
Well Barca scored 102 with Ronaldo and 110 with Messi, but Messi scored 9 more than ronadlo did so it looks like he actually made up thay difference