These are some of mine:

  1. Pepe was actually a better defender than Ramos, but Ramos’ knack for important goals (not a defender’s job) and what he won with Spain made him the better player in people’s eyes.

  2. Courtois should have been in the top 3 of the ballon D’or ranking in 2022.

  3. Xavi was a more complete midfielder than Iniesta. He pressed better, controlled games better, gave better weighted passes, and was also a good dribbler when pressed (Iniesta was the better dribbler overall). I’d say he was the better one.

  4. Modric and Kroos have far bigger careers with Madrid than Zidane did.

  5. Zidane and Ronaldinho were great players but were sometimes frustrating to watch and ineffective even in their primes. Their convoluted style of doing simple things made them highlight champions.

  6. Luis Garcia generally played the biggest role in taking Liverpool to the UCL final in 2005, but his name is hardly mentioned when that UCL win is mentioned (Gerrard, the Scouse, vs Garcia, the foreigner)

  7. Pique was a better defender than Puyol. The latter was prone to mistakes and making rash decisions, while Pique was far more intelligent.

  8. Eto’o had a bigger impact in Barca than Suarez did. The former came in 2004 when Barca hadn’t won the league since ‘99. He became the league top scorer for two straight seasons as Barca won the league, then the league and UCL double. He also won the treble in 2008/09. Suarez, on the other hand, came when Barca were already dominant, but just having a bad spell.

  9. Gerrard dived for the penalty which led to Liverpool’s equalizer in 2005 UCL final.

  10. Carvalho is the most underrated defender in his generation. He was basically Mourinho’s wingman.

  11. If Lampard played in this age, with those same stats, he’d be recognized as the best amongst the three.

What are yours?

  • Heddlo@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    I’m not sure who has ever said iniesta was better than Xavi. No one I know. I’ve said that about carvalho for years. And I also think John Terry was massively overrated and only looked good when carvalho was next to him, because he was there to mop up all JTs mistakes.

  • afellownerd12@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    1. UCL is a higher level of football than the Euros or World Cup.

    2. Michael Carrick is one of the best holding midfielders of his generation.

    3. “Tap in merchants” get waaaay too much hate.

    • SoothedSnakePlant@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      Everyone knows that number 1 is true. The players have had years to form a cohesive tactical system, and the clubs aren’t limited to a specific geographical region from which they can recruit from.

  • NotAnotherBadTake@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    1. Countinho wouldn’t have necessarily avoided a mid-peak flop had he stayed at Liverpool. He’s a world class player victim to transitional periods at Barcelona and Bayern, sure. But his role at Liverpool was only perfect for that time only and the eventual evolution of Klopp’s game would have exposed the same defending weaknesses he couldn’t improve upon in Spain. The man is a playmaker, but lacks versatility and actually thrives in very confined roles.

    2. Teams like Porto and Benfica absolutely Could shell out the money and compete for more international domination but choose not to because they figured that operating in the green is sometimes more important than winning - selling their players for huge profits is the priority and they’re happy with that

    3. Had Pep used Ibra the way that Ibra wanted to play, he would have still won the UCL.

    4. R9 peaked at Barcelona (idk if “unpopular” but I feel like a lot of revisionism sees R9 being the best version of himself at Madrid and not before)

    5. Beckham deserves far more recognition as a player than he actually gets. People - sometimes rightfully so - remember him as a caricature of a hot, celebrity footballer for than as an actual player and that should change.

    6. Madrid could have done without some mediocre performances should they’ve used Fernando Gago more. The dude had a great football IQ and was the sort of playmaker that could’ve exposed weaknesses in Pep’s Barcelona sooner than later.

    7. Van Gaal is, overall, a highly overrated coach who has overstayed his welcome. His refusal to adapt to changes in the game and player profiles goes beyond the stubbornness necessary to successfully play total footy.

    • blazev14@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      you couldn’t be more wrong about number 2 Jesus christ.

      portuguese clubs operate on a loss and have huge debts to pay, operational costs, academy infrastructure to invest in and most importantly, since they do not have the same money other clubs haver from TV rights or sponsorships, they NEED - not choose - to sell their best players for lots of money or else they do not stay competitive and go to financial hell. In addition to all that, taxes are not very friendly as every club needs to pay approximately 40/50% for every wage they pay.

      you clearly do not know what you’re talking about sorry.

  • Independent-Bag111@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Iniesta in my opinion is just a tad bit better than Xavi ,watch the Euros 2012 he had zero goals and assists by far the best player in the tournament,he was basically given role of Leo Messi for that Spanish team. We give you the ball you create something, amount of times he glided pass and set up through ball for Jordi Alba to run in behind a defender to create something was staggering.

    Even after Xavi declined or retired Iniesta took that mantle of Xavi role and excelled in it .

    There is a reason he was the man of the match in two UCL finals a world cup final and a euros ,big games there is less space ,most of the time them games are won in midfield he was always the point of difference.

    Only messi and Neymar can rival his dribbling skills and the madness about his dribbling or being press resistant it’s pure technique he doesn’t have speed or acceleration to get away.

    • norsemaniacr@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      I have a long time friend with which I too often (after a bottle or two of red) have debated Xavi vs. Iniesta. It’s actually a bit like the Messi/C.Ronaldo debate for me: they are both so stupidly good, but also different enough that settling one over the other is hard, so we should just cherish that we get to enjoy both.

  • PrimitiveSpecialist@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    My main one is people massively overrate Vidic. Not in terms of his peak ability, but his longevity at the top.

    I remember people used to say Vidic was class for longer than a decade when people used to have these discussions all the time when comparing Vidic with the likes of VVD, Carvalho etc but this isn’t true.

    He was only in Man Utd’s starting XI for 5 years, of which he was also awful in his last season in the clubs starting XI at the club and then became a benchwarmer under Moyes, aged 29. He was a finished player by 31. He was also nothing special before his move to Man Utd.

  • Altruistic-Skin-5608@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Judging players off national team performance is such a whack aspect because you can just get lucky and play for a loaded team where your bad spells are never noticed because there’s someone to cover your ass. Club form is a much better aspect because you actually have to work to get to a top club and maintain your position/importance there

  • 7_11_Nation_Army@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Most are correct. I disagree about Pique, though, no way he was better than Puyol.

    And maybe about Courtois.

  • 7_11_Nation_Army@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    My. opinion that doesn’t go down well with many people here is that EPL is not a top two league.

    But it is a correct opinion nevertheless, and I don’t think it is actually unpopular among people who watch football other than the EPL.

  • norsemaniacr@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago
    1. People didn’t dislike Pepe for beeing bad, but for beeing unsporting.
    2. I truly belive that GK vs. fieldplayers are so different that GK shouldn’t be in the same balloon price.
    3. Obv. Xavi was more complete. The most utilized 3-man midfield in modern football is (besides them all beeing more fluid and complete than "old days) one more defensive then the others, one more attacking/free role/creative than the others and one all-round. Xavi was the all-round and Iniesta the (more)creative. So obv. Xavi was more complete. Kroos is also more complete than Modric, exactly with the same setup/reason. Often those that favor Xavi or Iniesta is simply their preference for that type. I know that I favor Xavi>Inista and Kroos>Modric simply for that reason. That doesn’t mean the others aren’t fantastic.
    4. Yes? No one would say otherwise?
    5. Yes? Like most creative/AMs of the era?
    6. I think few non-Liverpool fans remember their whole campaign, but most neutral fans remember the final. So it makes sense…
    7. So far the points have mainly been true, but not unpopular as stated. This I guess is unpopular and I for one also totally disagree. Besides the skills (where I also feel Puyol have a slight advantage) Puyol was a great leader and personality while Pique on and off the pitch acts like spoiled brat. In terms of “better defender” the skill Puyol had in making his teammates better was unparalled and as much worth as the pure defending skill, which in total makes him at least one class above Pique.
    8. Also stats-wise pretty obv. imo. Another reason Eto’o was more impactfull is that Messi + Neymar + [insert anybody above average] would work, while the barca Eto’o joined did not have that level of attack around him (yet).
    9. Might be thin. But dive? I don’t think VAR would overrule it today, so lets just call it thin.
    10. You might be on to something here. He for certain isn’t among my first 10 or 20 defenders I think of when thinking great defender, but maybe he should be acknowledeged more?
    11. Amongst which three???
  • jlo1989@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    The Ballon D’Or is a meaningless award built around narrative that has far too much prestige added to it.

    The Champions League while technically being the most important trophy isn’t a genuine reflection of Europe’s best team. Knockout tournaments are just that. You can have one off night and get dropped.

    For example, the Real Madrid 3-peat only won one league title in that period.

  • mitchyjuice@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    10 months ago

    Can argue with some of mine if you like, I’m not gonna argue back:

    ​

    1. David Beckham wasn’t as good as everybody makes out. I watched him during his prime years. He missed many free kicks and his crosses were wayward; ALOT.
    2. Paolo Maldini is the greatest defender to ever live.
    3. Adriano should have been Brazil’s greatest player and it’s such a shame that his mental health took a nosedive.
    4. Sir Alex Ferguson is the greatest Manager to ever live, not coach.
    5. Greece’s Euro’s win is greater than Leicester City’s premier league win.
    6. Everton would have won the European Cup in the 80’s if it wasn’t for Heysel and the ban on English teams in the European Cup.
    7. (Not controversial but funny every time I think about it) Graeme Souness would be dead if he was caught by a Fenerbahce fan when he planted the Galatasaray flag in the middle of the pitch.
    8. Arsenal’s Invincibles team would get trounced by their recent runners up Premier League team, Liverpool 2020 winners, Man City from 2017 onwards, Man Uniteds Treble Winners, Poch’s Tottenham and Mourinho’s Chelsea.
    9. Manchester City are the greatest premier league team ever and in the top 10 of greatest teams to play the sport.
    10. Wayne Rooney is England’s greatest ever player, followed secondly behind Steven Gerrard.