Ballon d'Or (17 Viewers)

[Bianconero81]

Icardi.

- - - Updated - - -

Messi and neymar are another 2

- - - Updated - - -

Ah yea griezmann as well

- - - Updated - - -

One is Dybala, who are the other 19?

I am not including number 10s (only 10s that played as pure strikers) or Trequartistas on this list, only pure strikers. No Baggio, Platini, Maradona or even Messi and CR7. I'm not even going to include Cruyff, although he was a great scorer.

Pele
Henry
Lewandowski
Shevchenko
Weah
Gerd Muller
Vieri
Romario
Van Basten
Puskas
Suarez
Original Ronaldo
Van Nistelrooy
Eto'o
Batistuta
Paolo Rossi
John Charles
Gunnar Nordahl
Zlatan
Wayne Rooney

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Strickland]

Like footballers McDonalds was made with better stuff back when you were a kid.

It's very hard to see the logical explanation for players being better or football being played at a higher level back in the days.

Sports science leads to players running faster, running fast for longer, jumping higher, etc. Increased investments in statistics and analysis leads to players making better informed decisions and getting rid of low value actions (f.e. like long distance shots that you see less and less in modern football). The ever increasing wages for players, commissions for agents and the general value of the industry increasing leads to more and more competition for places in professional football both for players and for everyone else.

What can be put against that? In the past players came from poorer backgrounds so they had tougher character? The lower and mid level players had less money and therefore had more incentive to try and reach the very top? Performance enhancing drug monitoring was at a lower level? Although some of it probably is true, this surely doesnt outweigh the arguments in the previous paragraph.

Football has changed and there definitely is room for discussion about style, taste and things like that, the more effective something becomes, the more sterile it is, NBA and the 3 point shooting is a direct example of that. But its very hard for me to see any basis for arguments like "the level of defending was higher back in the day" or "footballers were made with better stuff" or "the level of football was higher". If it was true, the money involved is so big that surely someone would've thought of setting up a football academy that trained players 90ties style and made a fortune for selling these superior athletes. Or maybe 70ties style, because I'm sure that people that grew up with those footballers also thought similarly about the 90ties and 00ties generation.

 

[JuveJay]

It's very hard to see the logical explanation for players being better or football being played at a higher level back in the days.

Sports science leads to players running faster, running fast for longer, jumping higher, etc. Increased investments in statistics and analysis leads to players making better informed decisions and getting rid of low value actions (f.e. like long distance shots that you see less and less in modern football). The ever increasing wages for players, commissions for agents and the general value of the industry increasing leads to more and more competition for places in professional football both for players and for everyone else.

What can be put against that? In the past players came from poorer backgrounds so they had tougher character? The lower and mid level players had less money and therefore had more incentive to try and reach the very top? Performance enhancing drug monitoring was at a lower level? Although some of it probably is true, this surely doesnt outweigh the arguments in the previous paragraph.

Football has changed and there definitely is room for discussion about style, taste and things like that, the more effective something becomes, the more sterile it is, NBA and the 3 point shooting is a direct example of that. But its very hard for me to see any basis for arguments like "the level of defending was higher back in the day" or "footballers were made with better stuff" or "the level of football was higher". If it was true, the money involved is so big that surely someone would've thought of setting up a football academy that trained players 90ties style and made a fortune for selling these superior athletes. Or maybe 70ties style, because I'm sure that people that grew up with those footballers also thought similarly about the 90ties and 00ties generation.

As time progresses attacking players are protected more and more, for the benefit of the spectacle and the product on show, as it's all about business now.

It's pretty obvious to say that the comparative level of players is higher than it was in the 90s than it was for them against 70s players, than it was for them against 40s players, because the fitness and tactical aspects increase, but not on the level of talent against their peers. A fair comparison would be to give Pelé or Beckenbauer the advantage of 2020s training levels.

 

[Xperd]

Benzema has great CL stats for sure but do any of you guys actually remember Benzema being clutch and deciding big games in any of their 4 CL victories? I can't recall any.

He chose to be Ronaldo's sideshow. Stats are not the be all end all. Consistency and impact especially in high pressure situations is just as important to define one's legacy. Let's not even talk about his NT career, in an era where NT football is at it's weakest.

I mean look at our own Soybala who is among the top foreign goalscorers at Juve now because 'stats'.

 

[BayernFan]

Benzema has great CL stats for sure but do any of you guys actually remember Benzema being clutch and deciding big games in any of their 4 CL victories? I can't recall any.

He chose to be Ronaldo's sideshow. Stats are not the be all end all. Consistency and impact especially in high pressure situations is just as important to define one's legacy. Let's not even talk about his NT career, in an era where NT football is at it's weakest.

I mean look at our own Soybala who is among the top foreign goalscorers at Juve now because 'stats'.

He did so against Bayern and Liverpool in 2018. 2 goals at the Bernabeu after a hideous mistake from Ulreich and bad marking from Alaba and then the two goals in the final after even bigger Karius mistakes.

He also scored against us in the 2014 CL semifinal giving them a 1-0 lead for the return leg.

Apart from those I also don't remember him being very clutch for them, so agreed.

 

[Strickland]

As time progresses attacking players are protected more and more, for the benefit of the spectacle and the product on show, as it's all about business now.

It's pretty obvious to say that the comparative level of players is higher than it was in the 90s than it was for them against 70s players, than it was for them against 40s players, because the fitness and tactical aspects increase, but not on the level of talent against their peers. A fair comparison would be to give Pelé or Beckenbauer the advantage of 2020s training levels.

Not that obvious to everyone, no, that's the point I'm making. I think a lot of people - B81, Osman, Elvin and others would claim the exact opposite, that the comparative level of player in the 90ies was higher compared to nowadays. So it's not only not obvious, they'd say the exact opposite is obvious.

Agree about fair comparison, that's why I think it's only fair to compare players against their generation and from that draw comparisons against players of different generations. And I still wouldn't trade a young Chiellini for a young Cannavaro, Chiellini has dominated his generation in a way Cannavaro did not, not to mention the lack of loyalty on Canna's part against being super loyal like Chiellini, who has been underpaid (compared to his teammates) his whole career and hasn't complained or tried to push a move once. Put Canna in Chiellini's shoes and he'd be out of the club way before Conte showed up to coach Juve.

 

[JuveJay]

Not that obvious to everyone, no, that's the point I'm making. I think a lot of people - B81, Osman, Elvin and others would claim the exact opposite, that the comparative level of player in the 90ies was higher compared to nowadays. So it's not only not obvious, they'd say the exact opposite is obvious.

Agree about fair comparison, that's why I think it's only fair to compare players against their generation and from that draw comparisons against players of different generations. And I still wouldn't trade a young Chiellini for a young Cannavaro, Chiellini has dominated his generation in a way Cannavaro did not, not to mention the lack of loyalty on Canna's part against being super loyal like Chiellini, who has been underpaid (compared to his teammates) his whole career and hasn't complained or tried to push a move once. Put Canna in Chiellini's shoes and he'd be out of the club way before Conte showed up to coach Juve.

Talking about their technical level and the benefit of modern technology and advancements are two different things though. Also you have to consider aspects such as how defenders are taught in the modern game, which is just as much about being a footballer as an actual defender. Now they are inferior at marking, but the superior ones make up for it with pace and power. Modern goalkeepers are expected to make 80 yard diagonal passes, which is something Buffon could never do, but you're not going to convince me Alisson or Ederson are better than Buffon.

I'm never going to agree on Chiellini being a better defender than Cannavaro, and loyalty or how much money a player is paid are irrelevant factors. These are things a Juventus fan uses when comparing Juventus players. Maybe this is the problem here between our differing views. For the record, Cannavaro left Napoli and Parma due to financial difficulties at those clubs, and Juve due to Calciopoli. Those are events that can happen to any player, and if Chiellini is in those shoes he moves as well. Chiellini blossomed thanks to Calciopoli - he was a left back who evolved into a centre back in Serie B, and then had the benefit of the Conte rebuild years and the run of 9, it works both ways. But unimportant in judging the talent of players.

 

[Strickland]

Talking about their technical level and the benefit of modern technology and advancements are two different things though. Also you have to consider aspects such as how defenders are taught in the modern game, which is just as much about being a footballer as an actual defender. Now they are inferior at marking, but the superior ones make up for it with pace and power. Modern goalkeepers are expected to make 80 yard diagonal passes, which is something Buffon could never do, but you're not going to convince me Alisson or Ederson are better than Buffon.

I'm never going to agree on Chiellini being a better defender than Cannavaro, and loyalty or how much money a player is paid are irrelevant factors. These are things a Juventus fan uses when comparing Juventus players. Maybe this is the problem here between our differing views. For the record, Cannavaro left Napoli and Parma due to financial difficulties at those clubs, and Juve due to Calciopoli. Those are events that can happen to any player, and if Chiellini is in those shoes he moves as well. Chiellini blossomed thanks to Calciopoli - he was a left back who evolved into a centre back in Serie B, and then had the benefit of the Conte rebuild years and the run of 9, it works both ways. But unimportant in judging the talent of players.

The advancements make it that much more challenging for the defenders to not look like clowns. The size of the pitch, goal and the ball all remain the same, only the attackers gradually get faster, stronger, make better informed decisions and the regulators try to find more and more ways to make the game as marketable (attacking) as possible. That's why I can't wrap my head around how can anyone claim that the standard of defending was higher back in the day, obviously the threat the modern defenders face is much bigger.

For me loyalty is not irrelevant when it comes to rating whether you'd pick this or that player for your team. Or rating how big of a legend player is, Del Piero or Scholes or Totti automatically receive major bonus points from me for being icons of their club. But of course it's irrelevant if you're only talking on who was the better player.

 

[Elvin]

The advancements make it that much more challenging for the defenders to not look like clowns. The size of the pitch, goal and the ball all remain the same, only the attackers gradually get faster, stronger, make better informed decisions and the regulators try to find more and more ways to make the game as marketable (attacking) as possible. That's why I can't wrap my head around how can anyone claim that the standard of defending was higher back in the day, obviously the threat the modern defenders face is much bigger.

For me loyalty is not irrelevant when it comes to rating whether you'd pick this or that player for your team. Or rating how big of a legend player is, Del Piero or Scholes or Totti automatically receive major bonus points from me for being icons of their club. But of course it's irrelevant if you're only talking on who was the better player.

Loyalty only matters to fans of a particular team tho.
In neutral arguments loyalty to one team is seen as a weakness, i.e. Ronaldo is argued to be a better player because he performed for 3 different clubs, while Messi only for one.

 

[Karim30]

McDonalds and chocolate tasted much better when I was a kid, those things along with football have regressed quite a bit over time.

Maybe your mouth was cleaner

 

[Azzurri7]

Lewandowski, not even close IMO.

 

[BayernFan]

Lewandowski, not even close IMO.

Pretty sure Messi will win it because of Copa America.

 

[GiocataGrande]

Pretty sure Messi will win it because of Copa America.

according to polls and betting firms he is the most likely winner. Personally im rooting for Lewa

 

[Azzurri7]

Pretty sure Messi will win it because of Copa America.

I don't even understand the logic really but then again it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[BayernFan]

I don't even understand the logic really but then again it wouldn't surprise me.

My biggest problem with the Ballon d'Or is the lack of consistency in the last decade.

In 2010 Messi won because of individual numbers, but Sneijder won the treble and finished as runners up in the World Cup.

In 2013 Ribery won the Treble along with two other international trophies (UEFA Super Cup and CWC), but finished third behind Messi and Ronaldo who didn't win any major trophy but had great individual numbers.

In 2018 Modric won despite of Ronaldo having way superior numbers.

In 2019 Messi won on numbers despite Van Dijk won the CL.

If Messi win this year because of him winning Copa America then Ballon d'Or will have lost a lot of credibility as they're changing the criteria all the time.

At least be consistent in the votes/judgements. I'm not saying Ronaldo and Messi didn't deserve to win it in 2010 and 2013 as they had the best individual numbers - but what is the important factor - individual numbers or major trophies you won in the calendar year?

If we go by trophies then you'd give it to Messi (although I don't think Copa is worth that much). If we go by an individual season then it's only Lewandowski that can win it - alternatively Salah although I think he got of in his recent form too late this year.

 

[Strickland]

Trophies won - Jorginho
Individual numbers - Lewa
The most annoying - Messi

 

[Fred]

As time progresses attacking players are protected more and more, for the benefit of the spectacle and the product on show, as it's all about business now.

It's pretty obvious to say that the comparative level of players is higher than it was in the 90s than it was for them against 70s players, than it was for them against 40s players, because the fitness and tactical aspects increase, but not on the level of talent against their peers. A fair comparison would be to give Pelé or Beckenbauer the advantage of 2020s training levels.

That is absolutely true. Its the reason I don't think these comparisons are fair. For example, look at the top scorers in history in the CL, EPL, Serie A, La Liga. They're all going to end up being players from this generation. and its precisely that, players are methodical about everything nowadays, its all about gaining margins in every aspect that affects performance. Pele and Beckenbaur did not have these advantages. I do believe that if they were in this era, they'd be even better than they were back then, and that's crazy because both of them are legends as it is.

 

[Lion]

footballers now days are way better than the old farts of the past.

 

[zizinho]

footballers now days are way better than the old farts of the past.

Yeah because they are all in their primes. Those other are like really old

 

[Bianconero81]

That is absolutely true. Its the reason I don't think these comparisons are fair. For example, look at the top scorers in history in the CL, EPL, Serie A, La Liga. They're all going to end up being players from this generation. and its precisely that, players are methodical about everything nowadays, its all about gaining margins in every aspect that affects performance. Pele and Beckenbaur did not have these advantages. I do believe that if they were in this era, they'd be even better than they were back then, and that's crazy because both of them are legends as it is.

More games across a season, especially in the CL helps that narrative. Ronaldo wouldn't have scored 1/3rd of his total in the CL with 6-7 games every two seasons in the old European Cup.