Xavi Hernández

[jamrock]

Yh and u also said he only really became WC under pep, and wasnt staging cl final and all these things.

So you are changing your argument

 

[FlaFCB]

I didn't say international tournaments make someone world class. But that someone can't be world class and almost completely be missing from the international tournaments that took place exactly in the period he was supposedly a player of world class quality. Not to mention that during 2002-2004 Barcelona was hardly a team that played on the biggest stage. How can you be world class and not even play in the greatest games, the games with the highest pressure? In other words, the exact games that make someone world class?

Now not only fallacy, but being a strawman. Congrats. Strange admiting to be wrong is so damn hard. Jamdav would be proud.

 

[serghei]

Now not only fallacy, but being a strawman. Congrats. Strange admiting to be wrong is so damn hard.

I did admit I was wrong about the 2006 CL final, with his injury.

But I won't admit I am wrong about Xavi being world class at Gomes' and Denis' age. He was not world class imo, not according with my definition of "world class", which has certain criteria that Xavi at 22-24 doesn't do well at.

 

[FlaFCB]

I did admit I was wrong about the 2006 CL final, with his injury.

But I won't admit I am wrong about Xavi being world class at Gomes' and Denis' age. He was not world class imo, not according with my definition of "world class", which has certain criteria that Xavi at 22-24 doesn't do well at.

You are wrong, admitting or not. Very, very wrong. "Your definition" is a strange one, btw.

 

[serghei]

You are wrong, admitting or not. Very, very wrong. "Your definition" is a strange one, btw.

I don't agree that my definition is strange. My definition seems to apply the same criteria as FIFA does when determining the best players at the end of the season. Considering Xavi wasn't even top 20 in neither of the season in dicussion (2002-2003, 2003-2004 mostly), I take it a lot of people share my thoughts.

Some here don't. Absolutely no problem. I'm a peaceful man. Can accept that.

 

[FlaFCB]

I don't agree that my definition is strange. My definition seems to apply the same criteria as FIFA does when determining the best players at the end of the season. Considering Xavi wasn't even top 20 in neither of the season in dicussion (2002-2003, 2003-2004 mostly), I take it a lot of people share my thoughts.

Some here don't. Absolutely no problem. I'm a peaceful man. Can accept that.

Those people also don't think Xavi was nothing special under Pep either. He would just "pass sideways" to them.

You keep dogding a lot of good arguments, like the video of Xavi for spain vs england in 2004. Not even one comment. And it was posted 2x. The same old Xavi that would amaze the world a few years down the road.
Or about Xavi helping Barça win the 98-99 liga, when Pep got injured. And he was 19 then. He was always a special player. We were actually lucky he didn't leave during gaspart era. If Xavi was english, or played in england, he'd had been on those lists you love way sooner.

 

[gasgas]

[MENTION=15262]serghei[/MENTION] what are you trying to achieve?

 

[BBZ8800]

I'm 28. I've watched Barca under Rijkhaard. Now that's out of the way, which are the things you're talking about. Elaborate.

The discussion is Xavi being world class at age 22-24. Not about anything else. I don't think he was and gave arguments, according to the definition I use for the term world class.

If anything, you seem to agree with the fact that Pep elevated Xavi to a new level, which is entirely different to what [MENTION=21618]FlaFCB[/MENTION] posted. She said Pep only used Xavi, didn't develop him. Now you say Pep elevated Xavi to a point that maybe only 5-10 midfielders have ever reached. Which is one of the points I made and was argued against by Flavia and khaled.

Serghei, instead of using only a world class level, I'll try to add more ranks:
100/100: Xavi at his prime, under Pep. GOAT. (age 28-32)
90/100: Xavi during Rijkaard (age 23-28)
-- let's say that it is a level of current Verratti, Modric etc. Top 3-4 Cms in the world in this moment.
80/100: Xavi before Rijkaard (age 20-21-22)
-- let's say that it is a level of prime Fabregas, current Thiago Alcantara, current Gundogan, Rakitic. Top10-15 Cms in this moment.
70/100: Xavi aged 18-19:
-- level of current Gomes, Denis, Kovacic Top 30-40 Cms in this moment.
60/100 players who are probably weaker than Xavi aged 18: Rafinha etc

So, yes, Xavi improved over years.
Pep raised Xavi's level into another dimension. But he raised his game to maybe a level of a best Cm ever.
So, he was a no1 ever in that moment, while before that, he was a top 3-4 Cm in the world.

So, Xavi didn't actually jumped from level of Denis/Rafinha to a GOAT.
He jumped from let's say current Verratti's level into an absolute Goat.

About other things, mentioning Barca before Rijkaard, and Barca in 2007 and 2008 (how Xavi wasn't able to win us titles then).
Well, we had such a great team from 2006-2015 that a lot of players profited insanely from eachother.
Xavi was great, but imagine if he played in 80s without Messi+Iniesta. Or if his prime was in early 00s with Kluivert and Saviola as attackers...

Xavi was happy to be in his prime in era coached by Pep, and partnered by Iniesta and Messi.
Without Pep, Messi and Iniesta, Xavi would maybe always stayed at 90/100 level and he would never reached this status (helped by Pep, our tactics built around him, and helped by Iniesta+Messi).
The same could be said about Iniesta or Messi.
I mean, imagine if Iniesta had his prime from 2018-2028, in era without Messi, Pep and Xavi, where his midfield teammates will be maybe Roberto, Denis and similar guys, accompanied by a leader Neymar (lol). In such a surrounding, Xavi-Iniesta-Messi would have never reached their heights.

So, to some extent you are right: Xavi from 2002 was weaker than Xavi from finals of 2009 or 2011.
But again, Xavi from 2002 was way better and influental than 22 years old Denis.

** Also, another thing bothers me lately:
1. people say: we can't compare our players with Xavi+Iniesta, we should settle for weaker players
= ok, fine
2. but... we won't have a new Messi ever again. So, only without Messi, we are 50% a weaker team
3. also, we'll never have Puyol again

Now, let's say that a team from 2011 was a 100% perfect team (Pep-Xavi-Iniesta-Messi)
-- now, without Messi, every team without him drops to 70% of it's strength (an example)
-- but then, if you remove Xavi-Iniesta from those 70%, what do we have then, a 50% of our legendary team?

I want to say:
1. we can't replicate a team from 2009 or 2011, we won't have Messi
Ok:
2. but then, let's try to replicate some "normal" team, let's say Rijkaard's Barca from 2006 with Ronnie, Etoo, Xavi, Iniesta
-- but here is the problem: we again can't replicate Ronnie. We have Neymar (ouch)
-- further, we can't replicate Messi, Ronnie, Xavi, Iniesta, Puyol (ouch)
What is worse, we can't replicate even someone like Deco...

I mean, with that logic, we will soon drop (without Messi and Iniesta) to a level like in Gaspart's era, if your leaders will be: Neymar-Denis and Gomes.
I mean, a team in 00s, with Rivaldo couldn't do shit...
How will a team with Neymar-Denis and Gomes do something then?

I talked a lot about a new cycle and fresh blood.
Denis and Gomes are good since they are young and motivated.
But still, for a new Barca's generation, we will need something more than that.

If La Masia won't produce anything, and if Denis+Gomes is the best (most expensive) midfield duo which we can afford, then we are screwed...

 

[serghei]

[MENTION=15262]serghei[/MENTION] what are you trying to achieve?

Me?

Nothing. People attacked me because I said Xavi was not world class imo at 22-23.

 

[FlaFCB]

Me?

Nothing. People attacked me because I said Xavi was not world class according to me at 22-23.

Nobody "attacked" you. Just called you on your BS. And not for that either, but from your varying arguments about Xavi having problems like gomes do now, at the same age. You tried a lot of different fallacies.

 

[serghei]

Nobody "attacked" you. Just called you on your BS. And not for that either, but from your varying arguments about Xavi having problems like gomes do now, at the same age. You tried a lot of different fallacies.

Didn't say he was having problems like Gomes is having now. I made a general point about players being a work in progress, and that even Xavi was like that. Then you really went to the extreme by saying no, Xavi was the same when he was Gomes' age as he was under Pep - world class. From here it started this whole talk about what is world class and what isn't according to a lot of people's definitions.

 

[khaled_a_d]

Players always speak highly about the managers that promoted them in the first place. Nothing more in Messi's comment than high praise for the manager that promoted him in the first team. It's normal. Pep said about Lahm he is the most intelligent player he worked with. Doesn't mean it's true. Players praising each other, or praising a manager right after that manager died, or the manager that promoted them is a very nice gesture, and not much more than that.

I don't think I'm confusing playing team to full potential and player development. I think the two are perfectly related, whereas you and Flavia seem to think a team that is playing to it's full potential has no role whatsoever in the development of the players into better versions of themselves. And it's just a matter of dates that Xavi and Iniesta exploded when Pep came, and he actually had no influence over their development, he just used them well. And if another manager had come before Pep and used a similar system, they would've been as good as they were in 2009-11 even when they were 23-24 years old. I'm sorry, it has nothing to do with bias over someone, I just think it's wrong.

To me, when you play amazing football, win 6/6 titles in a year, humiliate your rival 5-0 and 6-2 in some of the most one sided Clasicos ever, win 2 CLs (and being extremely unlucky not to play 4 Champions League finals in 4 years and maybe win them all), win 3 La Ligas in a row etc., it is impossible not to become a better player in a team like that. Winning and playing at the highest level consistently is what makes a player become better in the first place. Ability is there before, but it is the continuous usage of that ability in a consistent manner, at the highest level, under the right platform, that perfects it and elevates it. That is what happened under Pep. Players becoming better by using their abilities consistently and at the highes level, thus elevating that ability into something more. It's not a mere coincidence that all of Messi, Iniesta and Xavi had the best years under Pep, because all Pep did was use them well. That's undermining the influence of a master manager, by overrating the younger (22-24) versions of Xavi and Iniesta, and saying there were the players from under Pep all along, the past managers were at fault (including Rijkhaard it seams). It's not how it works for me.

I never said Pep would've done what he did at Barcelona at Crystal Palace. Of course he was lucky as well to have those players. That's not the point of the dicussion. But he wasn't lucky in the sense that he had 3 attacking players that score 130 goals a season. That's extremely rare, people talk about that trio as the best front three ever. There is luck, and there is luck. To put things in perspective, opposition fans talked before the season even started in 2014-15 (check on redcafe) that this MSN trio would bring us glory that year. A lot of the posters there thought that with Suarez' signing we would win the treble. I don't remeber people saying we'll win the treble when Pep took over in 2008, or that we will beat Madrid 6-2 that season. Probably because we barely ended 3rd before Pep came and were humiliated by Madrid 4-1, and we were not a game away of being Champions like before Enrique. Before Lucho came, we won both games in La Liga against Madrid. We actually even scored 4 goals in Bernabeu and won 4-3. That was already a team which didn't need a lot of changes, if it was capable of beating the CL winner from that year on their home ground while scoring 4 goals. Compare it with the team Pep took, who were beaten 4-1 by a much inferior Madrid. Pep had to change the whole team, Lucho had to tweak some things and did that with some solid transfers.

I still stand to my points and I don't really feel you have answered any of them. We are reaching a point of respectfully agree to disagree here.
That said,Xaviesta&Messi was called 3 best trio ever b4 MSN. 2 of them was carrying their NT and the other was "being healthy" away from being the world best b4 Pep arrived.
And their are many fans who though Suarez signing were terrible b/c a team can't work with such 3 stars in same team. Many though our time was over with Cr7 seem in better form than Messi,Bale looking better than Neymar in their 1st season and Ancelotti working his magic with the team.
You are giving a pass for Pep for things you won't do the same for Lucho IMHO.

 

[serghei]

I still stand to my points and I don't really feel you have answered any of them. We are reaching a point of respectfully agree to disagree here.
That said,Xaviesta&Messi was called 3 best trio ever b4 MSN. 2 of them was carrying their NT and the other was "being healthy" away from being the world best b4 Pep arrived.
And their are many fans who though Suarez signing were terrible b/c a team can't work with such 3 stars in same team. Many though our time was over with Cr7 seem in better form than Messi,Bale looking better than Neymar in their 1st season and Ancelotti working his magic with the team.
You are giving a pass for Pep for things you won't do the same for Lucho IMHO.

Xaviesta & Messi was called the best trio ever before MSN, but not before Guardiola came. When Lucho came, people were talking about Barcelona having an insane attacking line right after Suarez was announced. He basically implemented some top transfers, got the players motivated again (especially after january) and fixed some defensive issues we had in the season before, especially at set-pieces.

I've also said that with Tata Martino we didn't have such a horrific season, as we did in 2007-08. Let's remember we played two finals in that season, whereas in 2008 we were a mess. So, the transfers we did when Lucho came were right on time to fix some things that clearly dragged us down with Martino. And under Tata, while not having a CF and playing with Pinto as a GK for the most part, we almost made the double. We were in a much worse state in 2007-08, when Pep came, then when Lucho took over.

 

[El Flaco]

Xavi's goal vs. Al Khor

[gfy]OrderlyDecentHoatzin[/gfy]

[gfy]CooperativeOblongFlies[/gfy]

[gfy]BlindSmartDromaeosaur[/gfy]

 

[khaled_a_d]

Xaviesta & Messi was called the best trio ever before MSN, but not before Guardiola came. When Lucho came, people were talking about Barcelona having an insane attacking line right after Suarez was announced. He basically implemented some top transfers, got the players motivated again (especially after january) and fixed some defensive issues we had in the season before, especially at set-pieces.

I've also said that with Tata Martino we didn't have such a horrific season, as we did in 2007-08. Let's remember we played two finals in that season, whereas in 2008 we were a mess. So, the transfers we did when Lucho came were right on time to fix some things that clearly dragged us down with Martino. And under Tata, while not having a CF and playing with Pinto as a GK for the most part, we almost made the double. We were in a much worse state in 2007-08, when Pep came, then when Lucho took over.

I would argue we were better in 2008 than 2014,the 2008 team reached SF of both CDR & CL and was competing for Liga until March with half of the team injured.
Our "fantastic four" was available in what? 4-5 games in the full season? if you consider health that 2008 season was actually better than 2014.
And please,people say everything. People got hyped with Suarez signing because he is well known player,just like they got hyped for Ibra & Henry b4. But there were way more criticism to his signing more than those 2 signings due to belief we didn't need him,won't fit well and the team has bigger needs. They weren't called the best in the history b4 playing a second either and most people had RM winning the League than Barca winning anything.
Sorry,but the whole"people" argument is as biased as it gets,redcafe forums doesn't decide expectations and how we rate a coach