Ballon d'Or 30-man shortlist. Who should win?

[Evilo]

Ballon d'or shouldn't go to the best player. It should go to the player who had the best season.
This year, Messi shouldn't win it. Ronaldo neither, but then again, I can think of two BdO he stole from Messi, including one that was an absolute travesty because of last minute rule changes.
Anyway, in a WC year, the WC should be important, as well as domestic titles, and the CL obviously.
Messi qualifies in one of those, Ronaldo as well.
Modric, Varane and Hazard qualify for 2/3 good points in that and as such had a better season.

Still think the campaign of "hey Modric has been underrated for years, let's give it to him since the big 2 had a (rather) down year" is a bad narrative.
But bad narratives have made BdO winners plenty of times (see Cannavaro).

 

[Corto]

Nope, watched plenty of Real Madrid league games (probably 80-90% including extended highlights). Modric has been mediocre in league games for the most part (big part in why Real Madrid have been poor in the leagie) and was average in the majority of CL games except towards the end of the tournament.

I don't know which part of the post is more ridiculous...
You thinking extended highlights somehow counts as watching the game (especially when it comes to watching a midfielder), or that Modric was somehow subpar on any level last season (including the absolutely ridiculous narrative that he was in any way to blame for their early season form last season).

 

[Evilo]

And I think it's ridiculous to think Modric had a surreal WC. He hardly had. He played excellent, like he usually does, but certainly wasn't a Maradona 86 cameo.

 

[Corto]

Still think the campaign of "hey Modric has been underrated for years, let's give it to him since the big 2 had a (rather) down year" is a bad narrative.

While I do agree that a LOT of people have only come to see how good Modric is in this WC (especially the casual fans, and even a good number of people working in football for a living - media and pundits), and it's now the hipster thing to go around talking how they knew it and he was underrated blah blah...

He did actually have a great season.
I mean, people like Messi put him as #1 in the FIFA voting.
(at the same time, Modric voted for Varane, btw)

Hazard had a great season individually, but not better than Messi or Ronaldo, not even close. And team accomplishments (club did nothing, 3rd place WC) are not enough to offset the achievements Modric and Varane had while being key players for their teams in both CL and WC, nor is it enough to offset the difference between him (Hazard) and Messi and Ronaldo in La Liga and CL.

 

[Evilo]

Hazard had a better season because he had a dominant WC and is right now the most in form player in the world (Messi is close).
He also never had the support Ronaldo and Messi have had.

 

[Corto]

Hazard had a better season because he had a dominant WC and is right now the most in form player in the world (Messi is close).
He also never had the support Ronaldo and Messi have had.

He did not have a better season IMO, all things considered (Hazard).
3rd at the WC with Belgium and finishing in the EL spots in the EPL vs WC runner-up with Croatia and 3 straight CL title.
And as vital as Hazard is to Belgium and Chelsea, Modric is every bit as important to Madrid and Croatia.

...

And anyway, I realize Hazard plays surrounded with inferior teammates (mostly), but CL and the WC is where the most of the attention is - rightly so, the only two best-on-best competitions.
And yes, Hazard is on fire at the moment, but this early part of the season barely ever has any consequence on the votes.

To be honest, the voting should be for the season anyway, not a calendar year.

 

[Evilo]

Yes but it is a calendar year. We saw Ronaldo winning those with a hot stretch in October November December.
Hazard is red hot. And was better than Modric in the WC IMO.
Only thing Modric has on Hazard is the CL. And let's be honest if Hazard is on this Real team they still win the CL without Modric. That'll never be proven of course but Hazard deserves to be above Messi and Ronaldo this year.

 

[Corto]

Only thing Modric has on Hazard is the CL. And let's be honest if Hazard is on this Real team they still win the CL without Modric.

See that's where I think you don't get how just good Modric is, or how dependent on him Madrid are.

When Modric came to Madrid, they were topping out at CL semi.
Since then, they've won 4 CLs in 5 years, and with Modric in the team they ever only lost one single tie (to BVB in Modric's first season).
The loss to Juve in the 14-15 semi was when Modric was injured.

 

[Evilo]

I know how good Modric is. And I know he isn't what he's described right now, as a sort of generationnal talent.
He's the best midfielder in the world, in a generation where there's no great CM (Xavi, Iniesta). He's likely the best, but won't ever be in my book as one of the best ever.

Presenting it as if he's the main (or even sole) reason Madrid has won 4 CLs is just simply not touching reality.

 

[Corto]

He's the best midfielder in the world, in a generation where there's no great CM (Xavi, Iniesta). He's likely the best, but won't ever be in my book as one of the best ever.

For you, fine.
For me, he's definitely in a tier with Xavi and Iniesta.

While certain aspects of his game are inferior to either Xavi or Iniesta, taken on the whole, he's the most complete of the 3.
In fact, he's the most complete central midfielder of the last 30 years - maybe ever.
Rarely has anyone had that level of vision, composure, skill, acceleration, speed, passing, press-immunity, tactical awareness and defensive positioning. The way he opens up passing lanes is maybe the best thing about him, it is as perfect as it can get,

Given that he only left Dinamo at 22, and only came to Madrid at 27, that in the national team he plays for Croatia and not Spain...
There's nothing there that would separate Xavi, Iniesta and Modric - for me.

This is all opinion based, so not much point going into it further - but yes, for me Xavi, Iniesta and Modric are the best 3 of the last 30 years.
(though I don't hold anything against anyone who thinks Xavi or Iniesta would be their pick, but Modric would be mine)

 

[Evilo]

See, that's exactly what i'm saying when I say he's gone from underrated to overrated. He's not the most complete MF in the last 30 years. As for ever... what can I say?
People tell me I'm biased towards french players (though it's been proven time and time again I've criticized many french players), but this is so over the top...

 

[YNWA14]

It was Modric and not particularly close this year.

Messi and Ronaldo behind him.

It'll be nice to see Modric win though there was another midfielder that had an even better season in the last decade that didn't end up winning on the same merits.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Ballon d'or shouldn't go to the best player. It should go to the player who had the best season.
This year, Messi shouldn't win it. Ronaldo neither, but then again, I can think of two BdO he stole from Messi, including one that was an absolute travesty because of last minute rule changes.
Anyway, in a WC year, the WC should be important, as well as domestic titles, and the CL obviously.
Messi qualifies in one of those, Ronaldo as well.
Modric, Varane and Hazard qualify for 2/3 good points in that and as such had a better season.

Still think the campaign of "hey Modric has been underrated for years, let's give it to him since the big 2 had a (rather) down year" is a bad narrative.
But bad narratives have made BdO winners plenty of times (see Cannavaro).

Check the stats. I'm pretty sure Messi still had the best stats. Just because he had a "down year" doesn't mean he wasn't the best player last year.

 

[Evilo]

Stats don't do everything. And Messi didn't come through in key moments this year. That happens. In a WC year, the WC has to weigh more than anything else. Then the CL. Messi didn't dominate in either.

 

[Corto]

See, that's exactly what i'm saying when I say he's gone from underrated to overrated. He's not the most complete MF in the last 30 years.

So who's more complete than Modric then, genuine question? And used it to achieve as much as he did?
Who had as much creativity, acceleration, speed, defensive and tactical awareness, opened up and closed passing lanes, vision, etc - all in one player?
There were players better offensively. Better defensively. With more vision. With a better shot. Better at tackling. Etc.
But I cannot think of any one who had all the traits that Modric has at such a high level, all put together in that one player.

As for him being overrated or underrated, I didn't need the WC to recognize how good he is.
I may be biased, but I'm not saying Rakitic or another Croatian is this and that, regardless of the WC...
Modric is a special player, and there are basically no holes in his game, making the most complex plays look really simple, so simple people don't even notice it.
Classic example is that goal Benzema scored at Barcelona a few years back... Everyone talked about Benzema's overhead kick, Marcelo's run, but the goal never happens if Modric doesn't open himself to a pass, plays 2 1-2s and carries the ball out from 20m from his goal to the half way line.

It looks so simple, goes unnoticed, yet how many players actually do that in his position...?

I will say it's funny that it took the WC for Modric to get this kind of recognition.
His stamina is still there, he's smarter than ever, but he's not as explosive as he was a couple of years ago.

Also, for what it's worth, this was a game where he played vs Xavi-Iniesta-Busquets (at their peak) and absolutely bossed the game. Killed it. But he was playing for the Spurs at the time, so noone cared. (and Rakitic missed a sitter that would've put Spain out of the tournament, so might've been more talk if Raki scores there )

 

[Evilo]

Well plenty of MF can be considered more complete.
I'll stick to French players and name Zidane or Vieira.
ZZ well I don't need to say much. He wasn't bad defensively but better than Modric at everything else.
Vieira was better than Modric at everything except passing. Including scoring and assisting.

 

[Corto]

Well plenty of MF can be considered more complete.
I'll stick to French players and name Zidane or Vieira.
ZZ well I don't need to say much. He wasn't bad defensively but better than Modric at everything else.
Vieira was better than Modric at everything except passing. Including scoring and assisting.

Vieria offensively does not compare to Modric, in any way... Passing, build up, press-immunity, whatever. Assisting? Please.
He was a wonderful player, but he was far from a complete package, physically dominant, defensively responsible and good with the ball - but far from some sort of a creative force.
I would never pick Vieira over Modric if I had to pick one for my team.

Zidane played most of his career more as a trequartista than a box-to-box midfielder, an old fashioned number 10, so it's hard to compare.
He played much more offensively and I wouldn't compare them in the first place.
But if you're asking whether Zidane was a better, more impactful player than Modric... I can't fault anyone who'd pick ZZ over Modric if they had to choose one for their team.
(it's just that ZZ is not the type of midfielder I was speaking of - and even so, definitely not more complete as he never had to put in the work that Modric does defensively every single game)

 

[Evilo]

Yeah, right, Vieria doesn't compare. Except he torches Modric in end product. Many more goals, many more assists.
He's not creative? He has double the assists.
At some point, you also have to look at this.

ZZ was so much better offensively, and yet hardly a non factor defensively. Thus a much better player than Modric.

 

[Corto]

Yeah, right, Vieria doesn't compare. Except he torches Modric in end product. Many more goals, many more assists.
He's not creative? He has double the assists.
At some point, you also have to look at this.

ZZ was so much better offensively, and yet hardly a non factor defensively. Thus a much better player than Modric.

I'll be surprised if I found any other poster on this forums who thinks Vieria measures to Modric in any form of offensive game other than aggressively attacking the box for headers.
And again, comparing goals, why? Modric is the best in the world at making your team transition from defense to offence. Opening up passing lanes, making your team always have passing options, press-immunity, ability to create pockets of space and exploit them, etc. - and most of this is done deep - Modric doesn't need goals or direct assists to be the most influental player on the pitch.
He allows your team to do it by making plays far deeper in.
(you have the Benzema goal as an example in the other post)

In the end, Modric is gonna end his career as a key cog for a 4-time CL winner (he won't get another with Madrid IMO - maybe if he moves somewhere next season ).
Vieria has zero. Playing for Arsenal, Juve, Inter and City.
And please don't go with the nonsense, Modric won it at Madrid because it's Madrid - all 4 of the recent CL titles are with him in the team.
As good as Madrid were, he was definitely key to their success.

...

As for ZZ, I love the man, and he was known for playmaking, vision, elegance, ball control, technique and played almost exclusively as an attacking midfielder. He never had half the defensive responsibilities Modric does.
I wouldn't think that's even up for debate.
Doesn't mean he wasn't a better or a more impactful player, but pimping out Zizou's defensive game is borderline ridiculous.

 

[Evilo]

Vieira was the best in the world for transition too. He took the ball away, and instantly turned the team into an offensive threat. And again, he scored more and he ASSISTED more.

 

[Corto]

Vieira was the best in the world for transition too. He took the ball away, and instantly turned the team into an offensive threat. And again, he scored more and he ASSISTED more.

I mean, if someone think Vieria had Modric's offensive talents, I don't know what to tell them.

And even though Modric's game is certainly not about scoring...
But just to check where you get your stats from...

Club career
Vieria - 651 games, 58 goals (0.089 GPG)
Modric - 595 games, 74 goals (0.124 GPG)

NT career
Vieria - 107 games, 6 goals (0.056 GPG)
Modric - 115 games, 14 goals (0.121 GPG)

By which metric did Vieria score more, except in "reverse world"?

(I'll look up assists later)

 

[Evilo]

In a world where nobody would compare the croatian league or the US league.
Basically when players are in their prime on comparable leagues.

So, yeah, much more.

 

[les Habs]

Wow, this thread is even more biased than I thought it'd be. Of course this year I don't think there's a slam dunk answer, well to a degree there isn't, but some of the names mentioned... And trophies players won with their clubs or worse yet when countries get overrated, especially in this thread considering the names mentioned... World Cup is especially overrated.

The, let's call it "mythology" (though the revisionism is strong), around Modric is kind of incredible at times. I'd say he's a generational midfielder to be sure, but his Madrid years get inflated around here. He never really carried them on his own and their league win really shouldn't have even happened. More to the point though, in his thus far six seasons at the club he didn't start 1/3 of a season's matches in four of those six seasons. On top of that not every season was that good either. Even the last two seasons he wasn't as good as the couple of seasons prior and this season, which is part of the period being assessed if I'm correct, he's not been anything special (though I wouldn't say that's entirely his fault). Of course it doesn't matter as he's going to win it in the end, but as @Evilo noted referencing Ronaldo and Messi the play who should win it doesn't always win, and I'd say it's more than twice that Ronaldo shouldn't have won it.

Messi being written off as he is is also quite entertaining. CL, league and Cup: 44 goals and 18 assists. Again, I know it's calendar year, but even then I'm seeing 26 goals and 11 assists. He delivered two trophies, best league in the World and arguably best Cup in the World and from any measure that I know he was Man of the Match much more than any other player who would be part of this discussion. He had a good World Cup and is on fire this season too.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Vieira was a great player, one of my favorites in that era, and is probably underrated a bit. But comparing his style to Modric isn't doing either one justice. Modric's style is far more intricate and creative, Vieira was a lot more tenacious defensively.

 

[Evilo]

Yet he got more goals and assists.