Maradona or Messi

[Chainsaw]

It doesn't matter if Messi keeps tearing Real Madrid and Manchester United new assholes, as long as he doesn't do it against Bolivia and Costa Rica than he can not be considered GOAT.

Exactly!

 

[La LL]

People tend to forget the honor that comes with winning the WC which is virtually unmatched in any sport. Winning the WC is not just a great feat in football, it's a very significant thing for your country. You're not playing for your club or yours fans. You're representing the entire country you grew up in. It's the closest thing many countries will come to war.

WC is probably the only sporting event that the whole world follows closely (even casuals and even Americans) and no the Olympics don't count because it's divided between so many disciplines.

Yes the Champions League is harder and more competitive and full of fancy football but it can't compare to winning the WC.

For me and many other people, the WC is the most revered of all trophies in the whole sporting world.

 

[gingerless]

Everyone is off track

 

[barcelonista]

Fransisco Gento won La Liga 12 times, and the European Cup an epic 6 times. Does that make him better than Maradonna?

You didn't mean to but you actually proved Razor's point. Which was:

A club player will hardly be remembered as the Best ever player.

See? Gento, or Puskas for that matter, have done and achieved what Messi's achieving right now. Puskas won 3 CL titles, 6 La Liga titles and scored 155 goals in 179 appearances for Real Madrid and 84 goals in 85 appearances for Hungary and yet he's not named alongside Maradona or Pelé. Because he doesn't have that damned World Cup trophy. In Gento's case it's even more obvious how high a WC trophy is rated. Gento, as you said, has 12 La Liga titles, 6 CL titles and even 1 Euro Cup title under his belt (that's probably something not even Messi will ever be reaching throughout his career). But no one puts him alongside Maradona or Pelé. So why should Messi be there if Gento isn't? Let alone at the age of 24 ...

I don't buy the "the CL is far better" thing either. A professional footballer like Messi, starting his first division football career with 17, ending it around the age of 34, has pretty much almost 20 (!) attempts to try and win the CL. For the World Cup Messi's chances are only 2010, 2014, 2018 (2006 he was a bench player for Argentina). So, IF AT ALL, 1 WC equals 6 or 7 CL titles. Those would be the fair proportions.

A CL final reaches around 100 million people world wide. A WC final reaches 500 million. It's not the same. Sorry. As biased as I am. It is how it is. And at the end I personally don't care. Messi doesn't need to be the GOAT. It's enough if he's the GBPOAT (Greatest Barcelona Player Of All Time) and tears Real Madrid a new one every year.

 

[ledzep]

UCL > 10xWC in terms of competitiveness.

wtf

 

[estranged]

yea shoulda put 15 instead of 10

 

[AnfieldEd]

yea shoulda put 15 instead of 10

Bullshit.

So Villarreal, Trabzonspor, Basel, Otelul Galati, Dinamo Zagreb, Genk, Apoel Bate, Plzen are all competitive yeah right.............

Same number of teams can win either competition.

CL:- Barca, Real, Man U, Man C, Bayern

World Cup:- Spain, Germany, Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina

I'd be amazed if anyone else wins the CL outside of this group in 2012 and world cup in 2014.

 

[estranged]

Villareal, Basel, Arsenal etc >>>> Algeria, Slovenia, North Korea, etc. Same with Euros, in Euros even the small teams are very hard to get past, look at the tough time Bosnia gave France and Portugal and they didn't even qualify, the smaller european teams are much stronger than the Africal/Asian nations in the World Cup.

World Cup:- Spain, Germany, Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina

Well Brazil and Argentina didn't really do jack in the world cup did they? Brazil that got showed up by North Korea and Argentina that was demolished 4-0. Uruguay, Germany have nothing on Man U, Man City, Chelsea, Real, Barca, Bayern, Valencia etc. compete in the CL so go figure.

Club Football in europe is way more competitive than the World Cup, and IMO Euros are more competitive than the world cup too.

 

[La Furia]

I don't think football getting global and CL getting more prestigious have that big of an impact on this. National success, no matter how hard people try to downgrade World Cup now, always have a bigger and lasting image than the club and individual rewards. And to me he has to do something worthy with the NT to surpass Maradona., Because no matter how many awards he wins at the club stage, his failure with the NT will always put a heavy shadow on him (Considering the NT he plays for is considered among the power-houses in the world).

This is completely right. Even Cruyff and Di Stefano, the poster boys for a players who had more trophies with clubs than the NT among the GOAT discussion, is rarely put on the same pedestal as Pele and Maradona. The most celebrated player in recent history is Ronaldo (the fat one), who never won the CL.

Even if you don't think it's more competitive, nothing has a more lasting cultural impact than the world cup. It's something the entire world gets emotionally invested in, and takes place 1/4th the amount of time the Champions League does. Less of something means less winners, making the winners stand out more.

Also saying Euros is bigger than the WC is just hilarious, really, countries like Poland and the Czech Republic over not just Brazil and Argentina, but Chile, Uruguay, Ghana, Mexico?

 

[estranged]

Euros is not bigger than WC but you won't be too wrong to argue its tougher and more competitive, look at the Euros group stages and compare them to the world cup group stages. In the world cup almost always 2 of the teams in each group are simply there for formality's sake and you already know the other 2 who will qualify, usually the Asian/African teams along with Australia/NZ etc. In the euros the pool is much smaller and a lot more competitive as a result, even the smaller teams can play decent football.

 

[La Furia]

By that argument, the CL is the worst of all three, because there's always some absolute terrible bottom feeders.

In all three there is the element of surprise, look at a team like New Zealand which on paper should have been target practice that managed to hold their own. There's just as much possibility that an awful side will fluke their way into the Euros. And for me the quality and excitement that the WC has that the Euros is missing you get in sides like Ghana, Cameroon, Mexico, US, Japan and every South American team more than makes up for letting a few more crap teams in.

 

[antonnn]

Read a few posts since the last time I saw this thread and decided to skip everything since people are insane. Messi wins CL's and Maradona didn't. Messi plays in one of the greatest teams in the history of football, Maradona played for Napoli during most of his peak. They weren't shit, but they are not this legendary Barcelona team. Maradona in the best team of all time, or even in the world at the current time, would have won numerous CL's, that is ridiculously obvious.

Plus the Argentina squad wasn't the strongest of all time but they weren't shit either, but the fact that one man was the teams focus and he captained them to a win, then to a final 4 years later, is something people really shouldn't underestimate. Don't get me wrong, I like Messi a lot, he's awesome, but you seriously can't compare him to Maradona.

Edit: I'm also bringing up something that I don't think anyone else has yet... But do you guys remember who Maradona's Napoli took on? Yeah, the ridiculously all conquering Milan side of the late 80's and early 90's, which not only won EVERYTHING, but also had guys like Gullit, van Basten, Ancelotti, Baresi, Maldini and Rijkaard, and beat them to the title TWICE with an inferior team. Do people not understand the significance of this? Maradona is the BEST player of all time, and Messi CANNOT be compared to him now, CANNOT. Later on? Yes/maybe, but people just need to be patient with the comparison.

END!

 

[Beast]

read a few posts since the last time i saw this thread and decided to skip everything since people are insane. Messi wins cl's and maradona didn't. Messi plays in one of the greatest teams in the history of football, maradona played for napoli during most of his peak. They weren't shit, but they are not this legendary barcelona team. Maradona in the best team of all time, or even in the world at the current time, would have won numerous cl's, that is ridiculously obvious.

Plus the argentina squad wasn't the strongest of all time but they weren't shit either, but the fact that one man was the teams focus and he captained them to a win, then to a final 4 years later, is something people really shouldn't underestimate. Don't get me wrong, i like messi a lot, he's awesome, but you seriously can't compare him to maradona.

Edit: I'm also bringing up something that i don't think anyone else has yet... But do you guys remember who maradona's napoli took on? Yeah, the ridiculously all conquering milan side of the late 80's and early 90's, which not only won everything, but also had guys like gullit, van basten, ancelotti, baresi, maldini and rijkaard, and beat them to the title twice with an inferior team. Do people not understand the significance of this? Maradona is the best player of all time, and messi cannot be compared to him now, cannot. Later on? Yes/maybe, but people just need to be patient with the comparison.

End!

wordddd

 

[Metaphysical]

Maradona beat Sacchi's Milan to the Title once, which Mancini's Sampdoria (the year after) and Serena's Inter (the year before) managed as well. in fact Sacchi's Milan were so all-conquering they won a grand total of one Scudetto (Capello's Milan won four, methinks you're conflating the two).

so unless Mancini and Serena need to be counted as All-Time Greats, I don't think you can use that argument in El Diego's favour.

Maradona also got handled by Real Madrid and Spartak Moscow, scoring 0 goals across 4 games against them (2 in 2 against Ujpest) in the '88 and '91 European Cups.

the World Cup argument is the last remaining citadel of the Maradona Over Messi Empire. but it's fine citadel, a towering one which Messi will have a hard time knocking down with a supporting cast that is as organised and stable as an epileptic monkey huffing nitrous oxide.

 

[Aryagorn]

Maradona beat Sacchi's Milan to the Title once, which Mancini's Sampdoria (the year after) and Serena's Inter (the year before) managed as well. in fact Sacchi's Milan were so all-conquering they won a grand total of one Scudetto (Capello's Milan won four, methinks you're conflating the two).

so unless Mancini and Serena need to be counted as All-Time Greats, I don't think you can use that argument in El Diego's favour.

Maradona also got handled by Real Madrid and Spartak Moscow, scoring 0 goals across 4 games against them (2 in 2 against Ujpest) in the '88 and '91 European Cups.

the World Cup argument is the last remaining citadel of the Maradona Over Messi Empire. but it's fine citadel, a towering one which Messi will have a hard time knocking down with a supporting cast that is as organised and stable as an epileptic monkey huffing nitrous oxide.

Okay, every body is pwned there