Duchene2MacKinnon
In the hands of Genius
- Aug 8, 2006
- 45,300
- 9,465
Bigger Talent: Ronaldo "El Fenomeno" or Mbappe?
- Thread starter Pavel Buchnevich
- Start date
- Jan 18, 2016
- 34,133
- 25,273
Il Mediano
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2018
- 1,837
- 690
Yeah, but that's just another pointless false equivalency. Ronaldo did use his talents. He reached the pinnacle of the sport individually and collectively. He just didn't do it for as long as some would want. And that's fine - everyone has their own opinions.
I'm assuming the OP used the R9 comparison with Mbappe because he's not only a similar player in terms of skill-set, but because they both took the world by storm at such a young age. It makes sense.
This is the problem with these debates. Everyone has their set of arbitrary conditions , and they think they've created the absolute truth. When in reality, when it comes to great players, the "truth" is highly contextual and subjective depending on the set of eyes viewing it. Biases exist , and we're not perfectly objective observers.
And worse, people feel simplistic stats or team accomplishments provide all the answers. They don't. Maybe in baseball where it's essentially an individual sport with the same isolated action over and over , but not in football. Everything is far too symbiotic.
An opinion is just that , and acting as if yours is the unquestionable truth is just an act of supreme hubris.
Some people think Manning or Rodgers is better than Brady or Montana , others think Lemieux is better than Gretzky , some say Bird was better than Magic or Lebron over Jordan... and on and on and on. There's reasonable thought towards both sides of the argument that goes beyond stats and team achievements. I , for one, think the rings argument is incredibly simple , for others, it's the end-all-be-all.
For me, when completely healthy and in top form, if I'm picking someone in a vacuum to win me a game in my backyard , I'm taking original Ronaldo. And I don't think it's particularly crazy to think that way. That, to me, is just as good of a litmus test towards true talent , as any other method those have deemed as the "truth".
In the end, it's all subjective , no matter how you want to dress it up. I think it's important to acknowledge that.
I'm assuming the OP used the R9 comparison with Mbappe because he's not only a similar player in terms of skill-set, but because they both took the world by storm at such a young age. It makes sense.
This is the problem with these debates. Everyone has their set of arbitrary conditions , and they think they've created the absolute truth. When in reality, when it comes to great players, the "truth" is highly contextual and subjective depending on the set of eyes viewing it. Biases exist , and we're not perfectly objective observers.
And worse, people feel simplistic stats or team accomplishments provide all the answers. They don't. Maybe in baseball where it's essentially an individual sport with the same isolated action over and over , but not in football. Everything is far too symbiotic.
An opinion is just that , and acting as if yours is the unquestionable truth is just an act of supreme hubris.
Some people think Manning or Rodgers is better than Brady or Montana , others think Lemieux is better than Gretzky , some say Bird was better than Magic or Lebron over Jordan... and on and on and on. There's reasonable thought towards both sides of the argument that goes beyond stats and team achievements. I , for one, think the rings argument is incredibly simple , for others, it's the end-all-be-all.
For me, when completely healthy and in top form, if I'm picking someone in a vacuum to win me a game in my backyard , I'm taking original Ronaldo. And I don't think it's particularly crazy to think that way. That, to me, is just as good of a litmus test towards true talent , as any other method those have deemed as the "truth".
In the end, it's all subjective , no matter how you want to dress it up. I think it's important to acknowledge that.
Il Mediano
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2018
- 1,837
- 690
It wasn't really a point, it was what the OP framed as the question. And it wasn't all aimed directly at you, either; more of an overarching point I wanted to make after witnessing the last thread. Apologies if you took it that way.
Obviously, when it comes to Ben Arfa or Okocha , you're using an extreme examples in an attempt to prove a point that didn't need to be proven. They are/were immensely gifted players. But they weren't the players in question. How far their talents went beyond technical gifts is debatable. To me, talent encompasses more than just that.
If you want to answer your concerns about I view talent , I would just compare all the available information I have on Mbappe vs Ben Arfa. Since you're from France , I'm sure you've got plenty of thoughts on the matter. How you decide "talent" may be different than how I decide "talent". That's just the reality of it. One of my best friends is from Grenoble , and to this day, he swears he's never seen any kid like Ben Arfa.
You said what players do with their talent needs to be considered , and I would agree with that to an extent. I felt the insinuation was that Ronaldo (and Maradona) didn't use their gifts as well as they should have. I think when you reach the top , no matter how long you're there for, it shows you used your gifts more than sufficiently. Nitpicking how long they were there for isn't an activity I want to participate in. Ben Arfa , though a teenage phenom, never came close to doing that.
So yes, perhaps you do have to marry what they do with their gifts with their talent , otherwise the pool is too large. but where's the line drawn? One Ballon D'or? Two? Do you even need one? A championship? A large sample of prime production? I'll let you decide. Luckily in this case , we're only comparing two players. Two of the biggest talents I've ever seen.
To me , it's extremely circumstantial and nuanced (like everything in life) , which is exactly what my entire post was about: It isn't black and white.
HBA was arguably the most talented player to ever come through a french academy. That's a quote from plenty of youth coaches.
And yes, he showed that at times. At times though. When he was 19, I remember a game in Paris, where he and Benzema showed class that was absolutely disgusting for the rest of the league. HBA scored twice IIRC, one from either foot. Some moves he put up in Nice, some games he had, were absolutely crazy.
HOWEVER, his mental was never up to his talent.
I said Maradona because I didn't like people saying Ronaldo could have achieved Maradona's status if he had been healthy.
Well Maradona could have reached the status he claims to have (and which many newspapers unduly give him) if he had played up to his (immense) talent. So I wanted to counter both the fact Ronaldo was dispatched as a "could have been" while also countering the fact Maradona is exactly the same (he's basically remembered for two weeks of an 86 summer and a couple of 10-15 goals seasons in Italy, hardly a career for the ages, but that's not the debate here).
Ronaldo is someone who had loads of talent and peaked to some great years. Then he got injured, and he reveinvented himself into a pure poacher (WC 02). Less impressive, but still efficient. He's IMO totally in Maradona's territory. Which is not quite at Pele's, Cruyff's, Beckenbauer's, Platini's and most of all Messi's level.
And yes, he showed that at times. At times though. When he was 19, I remember a game in Paris, where he and Benzema showed class that was absolutely disgusting for the rest of the league. HBA scored twice IIRC, one from either foot. Some moves he put up in Nice, some games he had, were absolutely crazy.
HOWEVER, his mental was never up to his talent.
I said Maradona because I didn't like people saying Ronaldo could have achieved Maradona's status if he had been healthy.
Well Maradona could have reached the status he claims to have (and which many newspapers unduly give him) if he had played up to his (immense) talent. So I wanted to counter both the fact Ronaldo was dispatched as a "could have been" while also countering the fact Maradona is exactly the same (he's basically remembered for two weeks of an 86 summer and a couple of 10-15 goals seasons in Italy, hardly a career for the ages, but that's not the debate here).
Ronaldo is someone who had loads of talent and peaked to some great years. Then he got injured, and he reveinvented himself into a pure poacher (WC 02). Less impressive, but still efficient. He's IMO totally in Maradona's territory. Which is not quite at Pele's, Cruyff's, Beckenbauer's, Platini's and most of all Messi's level.
bluesfan94
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2016
- 34,133
- 25,273
- Jan 18, 2016
- 34,133
- 25,273
Yup. Maradona was more dynamic but less consistent from what I’ve seen of the two. But MVB was good for 25 goals a season with no knees. So take your pick really.
Il Mediano
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2018
- 1,837
- 690
And this is all good. All fantastic players and deserve recognition as such-- it's your list. There's probably a handful I'd consider to be the best I've seen , and I really couldn't be bothered how people rank them. Anyone of them is good enough to beat the other on their day.
To me , who was "better" and who was more "talented" is entirely different. It's similar to comparing "peaks" and "careers." In rare cases like the legendary names you mentioned, you can consider both at the same time-- if you so choose.
To me, it's who was the best at playing the sport of football when they were at their very best. I can't shake what I saw R9 do to some of the best defenders I've ever seen. It was absurd and unique and he's still to this day the most electric player I've ever seen play in Serie A. I shudder to think what a pre-injuries Ronaldo would do to the current clubs of Serie A if the likes of Higuain can get 36 goals. Hell, friggin' Immobile and Dzeko almost got 30.
And yes, after the injuries, he was just a shadow of himself, yet still one of the best in the world for a stretch, imo.
To me, in terms of pure talent, R9 and Messi are at the top for me. Mbappe is just a notch below, yet obviously still incredible. If he's not the guy to take the torch from CR7 and Messi , than it's his own fault (or god forbid he gets injured). I thought Neymar was gunna be that dude , but I'm not so sure anymore.
To me , who was "better" and who was more "talented" is entirely different. It's similar to comparing "peaks" and "careers." In rare cases like the legendary names you mentioned, you can consider both at the same time-- if you so choose.
To me, it's who was the best at playing the sport of football when they were at their very best. I can't shake what I saw R9 do to some of the best defenders I've ever seen. It was absurd and unique and he's still to this day the most electric player I've ever seen play in Serie A. I shudder to think what a pre-injuries Ronaldo would do to the current clubs of Serie A if the likes of Higuain can get 36 goals. Hell, friggin' Immobile and Dzeko almost got 30.
And yes, after the injuries, he was just a shadow of himself, yet still one of the best in the world for a stretch, imo.
To me, in terms of pure talent, R9 and Messi are at the top for me. Mbappe is just a notch below, yet obviously still incredible. If he's not the guy to take the torch from CR7 and Messi , than it's his own fault (or god forbid he gets injured). I thought Neymar was gunna be that dude , but I'm not so sure anymore.
Maradona's peak is absolutely amazing. But only for a few games.
I'm not sure there ever was a more pure talented player than Maradona. But he was never the player his talent warranted.
MVB had so many injury issues. But he was a great scorer. Something underrated in his game was the way he took away the ball from defensemen. For some reason, he managed to be forgotten and tackled players in their own 30 meters to take the ball back. That's a feature few strikers have.
I'm not sure there ever was a more pure talented player than Maradona. But he was never the player his talent warranted.
MVB had so many injury issues. But he was a great scorer. Something underrated in his game was the way he took away the ball from defensemen. For some reason, he managed to be forgotten and tackled players in their own 30 meters to take the ball back. That's a feature few strikers have.
R9 was indeed incredible, but I don't think Mbappe's far in terms of talent. He has achieved more as well at the same age. Now, will he reach Ronaldo's peak? I don't know. He needs to work on his finishing. The rest is in place.
Football has changed though. Ronaldo might have succeeded more (as you seem to think) or on the contrary succeeded less. It's tough to say.
Football has changed though. Ronaldo might have succeeded more (as you seem to think) or on the contrary succeeded less. It's tough to say.
bluesfan94
Registered User
True, but at the same time, that means that Ronaldo could not have won the WC at 19. It was impossible for him to.
At 21, he led the team to 2nd and at 25, he won it again. Comparing WC stuff at certain ages is silly because it's not always possible.
Il Mediano
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2018
- 1,837
- 690
Football has definitely changed. I'm not one of those people that says "well back in my day" .... no, I think it's objectively impossible for the human race to be getting worse at football.
But, I think it's also objectively fair , when speaking about Serie A , to suggest it's nowheres near as strong of a league as when Ronaldo played. Dzeko and Immobile wouldn't be sniffing 30 goals in the late 90's in Italy, imo. I just cannot see that happening. The defending is just nowhere near as good/effective.
And the rule altercations have benefitted offensive football. That goes across all major sports. Offense makes money. Serie A is trying to claw it's way back into the public sphere , and in doing so, has tried to create a more attractive brand of football.
2016/17 was the most goals per game since 1949/50 in Serie A.
Ronaldo's last (only) full season in Italy was 97/98 , where the goals per game ranks 36th all time in Serie A @ 808 goals. 300+ less goals than current Serie A.
I obviously can't say Ronaldo would tear up Serie A without a shadow of a doubt , but I'm pretty damn sure he would.
Maradona took Napoli from a nobody to Serie A champions. The best player i have ever seen but not the most accomplished mostly due to his own faults. I was to young to remember Pele when he played for the Cosmos unfortunately
gary69
Registered User
Absolutely loved Okocha's technical skill and talent with the ball. Too bad he spent a large chunk of his best years at clubs which weren't at the very top of the European hierarchy.
And maybe he was somewhat more mentally challenging to coach and needed a more tailored team tactics to get the best out of him, but I still couldn't quite understand why none of the top teams took a chance to build their team around him.
I guess you can also credit him for taking Ronaldinho under his wing in Paris and honing his skills helping him to become the player he would be.
bluesfan94
Registered User
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Devils team discussion (news, notes and speculation) - offseason part I- Latest: Monsieur Verdoux
-
-
Upcoming events
-
Pelicans Lahti @ Tappara Tampere - Tappara leads series 2-0Wagers: 2Staked: $15,126.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-
