THe WC >>>>> the CL

Look mate, we can argue over this until we're blue in the face. If I had unlimited funds and could only buy one player at their physical peak, it'd be Ronaldo for me. You say Messi, that's fair enough.

What I know as fact is that the debate is totally subjective.

Its not the fact that Messi doesnt have a WC title, its not the fact that he hasnt played a final, heck, its not even that he hasnt played the semi.
Its the fact that he is simply nowhere near being the GREATEST PLAYER OF ALL ****ING TIME when he plays for Argentina and he has to deal with mediocre teammates.
When Maradona had to play with those some mediocre teammates( mediocres in terms of being able to compete with the best national teams at the time) guess what, he looked like the GREATEST PLAYER OF ALL ****ING TIME.

When they had to play in literrrally the most important game of their lifetimes and all the players were ****ting themselves, he went and scored 2 goals from nowhere in 5 minutes, thats what the GOAT does, its not how much goals you score against Getafe its what you do on a huge emotionally charged overhyped game. Im not sure Messi could carry his team the way Maradona did against England.

He definitely doesn't need to win a WC because its not even the pinnacle of the sport anymore.


Anyway, I thought Messi was really good in the last WC, he just had a moronic clown for a coach and he basically carried the team as far as they could go. Just a total mess, plus they ran into a great German side.

That said, I think he will probably **** the **** out of Brazil 2014 as long as some serious injury doesn't derail him. His pace, technique, and balance are top class. Ronaldo gets it done by being an athletic freak with amazing technique, Messi does it with the same technique but a style unmatched atm. Just watch some of his highlights where he skips past and jumps over people.

Not the GOAT yet, but definitely on that path.

Not his fault he's played under some incompetent coaches at international level. I've never seen Pele/Maradonna play, I find it super difficult to judge them with the players I have seen over the past 20 or so years. No doubt they were great players but time has moved on and so has the game of football, that needs to be taken into account IMO.

Messi is the best player I have ever had the pleasure of watching. This is just my opinion.

Like the guy says, we could argue until we are blue in the face and we probably will but there ya go.

is this an accurate statement from a futbol fan in the US:

talent level:
CL >> Euro >>>> WC

prestige:
WC >> CL > Euro

?????

lol at putting the euro over the world cup talent wise.

ok, that is an argument I can totally get behind.
Btw Zidane didnt exactly had a genius in charge when he led France in 2006... also batista wasnt THAT bad( altough he obviously wasnt Argentina NT material) and lol at calling Pekerman and Basile incompetent( chances are you dont even know who Pekerman and Basile are and you are putting the incompetent label on them).

or something similar I guess.

yeah man, NZ, NK, and Honduras are STACKED.

Is it really lol to think that the Euros > WC talent wise? I think it is super close and I might favour the Euros tbh

ok, fine, the 3 european teams that are rated 13th to 16th are better than Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Mexico, Ivory Coast, etc.

You would think that after you got spanked in the world cup you would have learned your lesson. The true is that beyond the european elite the rest looked preety average. You lol at new zeland, honduras and north korea yet lets see the results.

Out of 5 games the 3 worse sides you could come up with played against european teams they only lost 2.

top to bottom Euro's has the smaller range in talent between the first and the worst, in the WC its pretty lol at times depending on who is hosting.

So I think winning the Euro's is harder, but the WC has more prestige imo.

How can winning the euro be harder than winning the WC? oh god.

ValenFail at logic.

so? The CL has a huge range in talent , Libertadores has a smaller range. You dont see me suggesting that copa libertadores is better than the CL.

Europeans has a higher average quality of both teams and games, but it is not harder to win or better in terms of max standard. Pretty simple.

Spanked at the WC=All European final. Got it.

Once you get to the KO rounds its nearly always the 16 best teams in Europe atm, give or take a few weird results. There is some variance involved as well, as with ANY cup competition. But you will need to beat very good teams to win it, and I am of the opinion that only a few NT are better than your normal CL sides (ie the teams there basically every year).

its easier to have an all-european final when you have 13 spots.

All southamerican teams reached the last 16, all of them except 1 reached the QF ( and the team that lost, lost to another southamerican teams). That is consistency.

EUROPE! **** YEAH!

semi-grunch

probably the goat obv

better than Maradona more imprtant than Zidane, Ronaldo*2 etc imo

just because Argentina hasnt won the world cup with Messi in the team doesnt mean that he cannot be the goat. The world cup is an international donkament that the top 16 countries can win.

3 of the 4 semi finalists = European. Out of the contenders to win the WC there are only ever 2 non European ones.

There is a reason Europe has 13 slots. If it was a real WC (ie best 32 teams rather than a continental spread) it would be even more.

You always get all bent out of shape over this ****.

We all think S. America is really good, Copa America, great competition, and S. American teams did well last WC. Cool? We also had all the mediocre at best CONCACAF, AFC, and ACF teams (btw all the African teams except Ghana were **** at the WC).

SOUTHAMERICA!!!!! Maradona, Pele and on top of that you can call other people "negro".

lol at pele being as good as the modern elite

Comparisons across eras should always be relative to their era not absolute.