Bigger achievement...MJ 6 titles or Maradona winning 2 titles with Napoli?

[Shaka_Zulu]

I'm a huge football fan all my life, much more so then basketball (which I became a fan of due to the wild and enigmatic energy and playstyle of Garnett). But obviously 6 titles is more impressive then 2 titles.

But for context, for those of you who dont football or the golden era of Serie A Maradona (arguably the OG God of football together with Pele) won the super unlikely league titles with a mid level club like Napoli.

Basketball context and even MJ context. Maradona carrying Napoli to their first ever league title is like if Mj in 80s carried Bulls to championship against Bird and Magic. Yes Napoli were better in 2nd league title after their improved their team a bit when he was there for some years already. But Zola was young not a factor at all then, and Ciro Ferrara was early 20s and far from his peak. It was mainly couple good brazilian NT players with him.


Napoli winning league titles is so rare, that those 2 titles is the 2 of the total 3 their won in their entire over century long history.

[GSWFan1994]

the 1989/90 Napoli squad wasn't too shabby, Careca, Ciro Ferrara, Gianfranco Zola, Alemão, de Napoli

looks like a pretty decent squad to me

Yep, "decent" is underselling it, to be fair.

Careca was the starting striker in the brazilian national team back then. Alemão was a starter too.

As far as I remember, Napoli had 2 or 3 starters for the italian national team as well.

Napoli was not a bad team, if my memory serves me well.

Wasn't Canniggia (spl?) playing for Napoli then too?

I don’t remember against who it was but it was World Cup semifinal and all knew Maradona will be doubled all game and he served Cannigia with phenomenal passes and Cannigia scored one or two goals

They were my heroes and I’m not even Argentinian

Yep, it was against Brazil in the 1990 World Cup!

One of my saddest memories as a kid...

Hope you're doing well, buddy!

[bledredwine]

I'm not sure, to be honest, but those are my goats of both of their sports.
No one was as dominant as Maradona.

[GSWFan1994]

Is it actually possible to win in that sport with bad or middling team? Even if you GOAT, I imagine there is only so much you can do in Football. I said this before, but just relatively recently discovered that Football fans made those arguments, NBA fans make, like, Oh, Messi never won WC, he is not that good (before he did win). But in this sport, like what Messi can really do if defensive line sucks and concedes goals? Of course Napoli must have been great team, I just cant imagine how you can win with only one seriously great guy, especially if your competition are teams with several great guys.

I like team sports and I like Basketball for that, but I also like Basketball, because it is one team sport where Individual can be so impactful. So, in Basketball, those arguments kinda make sense, I still overall hate rings and all that stuff arguement, because it is team sport, but yeah, in Basketball, GOAT can carry a middly team to greatness. It is just not the same with Football or most other sports.

I think it's more likely to happen in soccer due to the 2 factors, let me explain:

1. In soccer, not all players have to attack/defend during the whole game (though this has increased in recent years, for example, you don't see Messi defending like a madman all game long, I think you understand my point), like in basketball, volleyball and so on. So you basically can afford to conserve energy on defense (if you are an attacker, obviously) and be more well rested in certain moments of the game to decide the match.

Also, you can afford to "sacrifice" 1 or 2 spots in your starting team to put very talented offensive players in the field, who can decide the game in a single play.

2. More "do or die" games (single elimination) = higher possibility of weaker teams stealing victories.

Now, if you take both these things into account, you can have ONE single play who decides the match in your favor... then you order your team to go full defense and basically create a wall to avoid the other team to play offense, like playing 11 versus 8 or 9. This is called "retranca" here in Brazil, I absolutely hate it, it's relatively new (started in the late 80s as far as I know).

You decide a 90 minute match in one single play, then you basically only play one side of the field for the rest of the match. Do that in single elimination games = high chance of upsets.

Heck, most national teams have been doing that against Brazil for decades now. Do you think it's funny watching that crap as a brazilian?

[Calvin Klein]

I think it's an impossible comparison as they're such different sports/leagues.

But I did see Diego play live a few times (later in his career though) and I got a Boca jersey (not one he used) gifted and signed by him.

[GSWFan1994]

Bro if Maradona is in your top 5 who’s the 4 guys ahead of him for you ? I’m just curious

I gotta say Maradona is my clear no 1 , maybe because I was a kid watching him play and there was no one even close to him , later after the games when we played soccer as a little boys we all wanted to be Maradonas or Cannigias

I said "at least", I have to think carefully before replying, lol.

I'm not that good as a soccer expert/historian to say, though I think there were quite a handful of players who had great peaks... just out of my head right now, in no order:

Pelé (1962/1963 his absolute best I believe)
Garrincha (2nd greatest carry job in a World Cup ever IMO, in 1962; friendly reminder that Pelé was hurt and played 1 match and a half)
Messi (many peaks to choose from)
Cristiano Ronaldo (ditto)
Ronaldo (Fenômeno) (1999/2000 I think?)
Ronaldinho Gaúcho (2005/2006)
Platini (1984/1986 IIRC)
Zico
Didi
Ibrahimovic
Cruyff
Beckenbauer
Falcão (brazilian midfielder, played for Roma in the 80s)
Di Stéfano
Van Basten
Zidane

* Friendly reminder that yellow and red cards were originally introduced in the 1970 World Cup... imagine playing in a match without cards, you could do whatever you wanted and would have stayed in the field.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying overall career quality, not accomplishments, just sheer peak (= 2 or so year stretch, IMO).

Then you have DOZENS of guys who didn't have as great an overall career as those mentioned above, but had a very strong peak nonetheless... someone like Shevchenko for example. Countless players fit this criteria.

Soccer is very hard to rank players in all-time list, specially nowadays, because some teams are ABSURDLY better than others... some teams nowadays are better than most of the best NATIONAL teams! It was not like that in the 90s, for God's sake.

[Wingy]

MJ because this Is a basketball forum:)

Plus Maradona played against farmers and plumbers, and everything today is automatically better than yesteryear.

[GSWFan1994]

Ronaldinho was amazing , but his prime was soooo short , if he played longer he could have valid argument being GOAT over Maradona , I agree

Ronaldinho 2005/2006 was the best soccer player I've ever saw in my whole life, and like I said previously, I've been following soccer since 1984 or so.

Better peak than Messi, Maradona, CR7, you name it. Obviously not better career than all of them.

But, peak for peak, considering results, entertainment, magical moments which drop your jaw to the floor... yep, give me good old "O Bruxo".

IMHO.

[GSWFan1994]

Similar to Wilt Chamberlain, so much of Maradona's appeal is romantic, a huge part of which is based on one tournament. And a huge part of that is based on a game Argentina might not have even won without one of the biggest officiating screwups in the history of sports. The fact he also scored one of the greatest goals of all time in the same match pretty much sums him up. Undeniable, generational genius marred by some pretty massive flaws, not least of which was his cocaine addiction.

It's hard to compare across eras, especially given how much more defensive Serie A was back then. But it's just impossible to put a player who barely cracked 100 career goals in top-flight European league play over the likes of Messi and Ronaldo, who put up video game numbers year after year after year against the best of the best. If you include national teams they both have close to 1,000 goal involvements apiece, which is just insane and cannot be ignored. I'd take either of them over him in a heartbeat, before you even get into anybody else.

Let me say I agree with your post, first of all.

Now, the point I made at the end of post #46 still stands, I think.

Did Messi, CR7 (and many others before or after) put up videogame numbers? Yes, absolutely.

But... they were playing with videogame rosters, AND on easy difficulty too.

I think that has to be taken into account when evaluating their careers.

For example, it's one thing to evaluate Haaland on an all-star-like Manchester City team, destroying the competition with barely any effort against 95% of the other teams... and another to evaluate Haaland while he's playing for a top 5 bottom feeder team, facing this very competition every week.

It's a matter of sense of the proportions.

[Lockdown504090]

MJ because this Is a basketball forum:)

Plus Maradona played against farmers and plumbers, and everything today is automatically better than yesteryear.

Is that the case in soccer too? I don’t see some crazy global growth increasing the player pool and elevating competition. Soccer been like that. What’s the change?

[Sedale Threatt]

Similar to Wilt Chamberlain, so much of Maradona's appeal is romantic, a huge part of which is based on one tournament. And a huge part of that is based on a game Argentina might not have even won without one of the biggest officiating screwups in the history of sports. The fact he also scored one of the greatest goals of all time in the same match pretty much sums him up. Undeniable, generational genius marred by some pretty massive flaws, not least of which was his cocaine addiction.

It's hard to compare across eras, especially given how much more defensive Serie A was back then. But it's just impossible to put a player who barely cracked 100 career goals in top-flight European league play over the likes of Messi and Ronaldo, who put up video game numbers year after year after year against the best of the best. If you include national teams they both have close to 1,000 goal involvements apiece, which is just insane and cannot be ignored. I'd take either of them over him in a heartbeat, before you even get into anybody else.

Let me say I agree with your post, first of all.

Now, the point I made at the end of post #46 still stands, I think.

Did Messi, CR7 (and many others before or after) put up videogame numbers? Yes, absolutely.

But... they were playing with videogame rosters, AND on easy difficulty too.

I think that has to be taken into account when evaluating their careers.

For example, it's one thing to evaluate Haaland on an all-star-like Manchester City team, destroying the competition with barely any effort against 95% of the other teams... and another to evaluate Haaland while he's playing for a top 5 bottom feeder team, facing this very competition every week.

It's a matter of sense of the proportions.

Sure. But they were also playing against incredible competition at a point in time where 95% of the world's elite talent had concentrated in Europe. And they were still faaaaaaaaaaar ahead of both their teammates and everybody they played against. Like you're not having 64/21 and 58/27 seasons like Messi did because of who you play with.

Obviously they're helping you maximize your abilities -- to say nothing of playing for Guardiola, which was also a huge advantage. But at the end of the day lots of great players play on lots of great teams and nobody's come close to duplicating what he and Ronaldo did. I guess Pele -- who I have massive respect for and would choose over Maradona not only for his talent but because he wasn't a drug addict who sidetracked his own career -- but I believe we've already had that discussion before.

I just feel like so much of Maradona's standing comes down to that one World Cup, and no matter how great he was one month shouldn't overwhelm other careers that were authored over the course of years/decades. I've seen Messi score probably four or five goals that were every bit as good as Maradona's legit score against England. They just didn't happen at the World Cup and should that really matter THAT much if we're talking about pure skill level?

Because that's really the only argument Maradona has given that Messi and Ronaldo both absolutely demolish him in terms of production, awards, trophies, longevity, basically everything else.

[GSWFan1994]

Sure. But they were also playing against incredible competition at a point in time where 95% of the world's elite talent had concentrated in Europe. And they were still faaaaaaaaaaar ahead of both their teammates and everybody they played against. Like you're not having 64/21 and 58/27 seasons like Messi did because of who you play with.

Obviously they're helping you maximize your abilities -- to say nothing of playing for Guardiola, which was also a huge advantage. But at the end of the day lots of great players play on lots of great teams and nobody's come close to duplicating what he and Ronaldo did. I guess Pele -- who I have massive respect for and would choose over Maradona not only for his talent but because he wasn't a drug addict who sidetracked his own career -- but I believe we've already had that discussion before.

I just feel like so much of Maradona's standing comes down to that one World Cup, and no matter how great he was one month shouldn't overwhelm other careers that were authored over the course of years/decades. I've seen Messi score probably four or five goals that were every bit as good as Maradona's legit score against England. They just didn't happen at the World Cup and should that really matter THAT much if we're talking about pure skill level?

Because that's really the only argument Maradona has given that Messi and Ronaldo both absolutely demolish him in terms of production, awards, trophies, longevity, basically everything else.

I understand, I agree with your overall premise.

I think the Maradona vs Messi example is that classic "peak vs prime" debate we see in many sports regarding the all-time greats, rankings, etc.

In Maradona's favor, his peak happened in the World Cup, the biggest stage in soccer, right? It's like playing very well in a NBA Finals I'd say. Plus the Napoli titles which have been discussed in previous posts. Overall a pretty strong case I'd say.

But... we have Messi's seemingly unlimited prime, which lasted for like 12, 15+ years, I don't know how much actually, lol.

Now I go back to my original point: it's very easy to put up godlike stats when you're playing with a great roster (and consequently facing a weaker opposition, due to the sheer scarcity of top level talent in this level of competition)... that surely has to count for something, don't you think?

Moreover, that's an interesting conversation... that's like comparing, let's say out of the blue, Bill Walton vs Dirk Nowitzki in terms of NBA. Dirk would obviously win in very fair terms, but still some people would side with Walton regarding peak performance.

[Sedale Threatt]

Sure. But they were also playing against incredible competition at a point in time where 95% of the world's elite talent had concentrated in Europe. And they were still faaaaaaaaaaar ahead of both their teammates and everybody they played against. Like you're not having 64/21 and 58/27 seasons like Messi did because of who you play with.

Obviously they're helping you maximize your abilities -- to say nothing of playing for Guardiola, which was also a huge advantage. But at the end of the day lots of great players play on lots of great teams and nobody's come close to duplicating what he and Ronaldo did. I guess Pele -- who I have massive respect for and would choose over Maradona not only for his talent but because he wasn't a drug addict who sidetracked his own career -- but I believe we've already had that discussion before.

I just feel like so much of Maradona's standing comes down to that one World Cup, and no matter how great he was one month shouldn't overwhelm other careers that were authored over the course of years/decades. I've seen Messi score probably four or five goals that were every bit as good as Maradona's legit score against England. They just didn't happen at the World Cup and should that really matter THAT much if we're talking about pure skill level?

Because that's really the only argument Maradona has given that Messi and Ronaldo both absolutely demolish him in terms of production, awards, trophies, longevity, basically everything else.

I understand, I agree with your overall premise.

I think the Maradona vs Messi example is that classic "peak vs prime" debate we see in many sports regarding the all-time greats, rankings, etc.

In Maradona's favor, his peak happened in the World Cup, the biggest stage in soccer, right? It's like playing very well in a NBA Finals I'd say. Plus the Napoli titles which have been discussed in previous posts. Overall a pretty strong case I'd say.

But... we have Messi's seemingly unlimited prime, which lasted for like 12, 15+ years, I don't know how much actually, lol.

Now I go back to my original point: it's very easy to put up godlike stats when you're playing with a great roster (and consequently facing a weaker opposition, due to the sheer scarcity of top level talent in this level of competition)... that surely has to count for something, don't you think?

Moreover, that's an interesting conversation... that's like comparing, let's say out of the blue, Bill Walton vs Dirk Nowitzki in terms of NBA. Dirk would obviously win in very fair terms, but still some people would side with Walton regarding peak performance.

Yeah, but that's the thing: Messi's peak was also incredible and, as you note, insanely long. He wasn't a star who burned out after an amazing 4-5 year run like Maradona. Once he started he pretty much didn't stop until Barcelona couldn't pay him anymore.

I'm eyeballing this so I could be off by a bit here or there, but over his final 13 seasons at Barca he averaged 45 goals and 21 assists per season with eight league titles, seven Copa Del Reys and four Champions Leagues with six Ballon d'Ors.

That is f'ing insane. And what's crazier is that Ronaldo was right there with him. We could watch the sport for another 100 years and never see anything like that again. If we do, all I can say is that I am very excited to see that player.

And I agree about teammates/coaching to the extent that he had about as good as you can reasonably ask for and that obviously gives you a tremendous platform for success. But again, you are not averaging nearly 70 goal involvements per season for more than a decade, which simply should not be possible, because you're riding anybody's coattails. They are riding yours.

[lars_rosenberg]

Jordan I guess. Napoli didn’t win Champions League in those years and isn’t that the equivalent of an nba title? maybe I’m ignorant but it seems harder to win than any of the domestic leagues.

I think stuff like Champions league has far more roll of dice luck involved, for best team, I think domestic is easier to win, CL is far harder to win, but for more underdog team, CL title would be more likely to win, I assume, because you can luck out more, its not single elimination, its too leg play offs, but on good run, you could just roll on, where domestic league is a long marathon and would be very hard for non favorite to win. Thats why Lester winning Premier was so unlikely, if they won any cup, it wouldn't have been much of a story.

By this logic wouldn’t it be more difficult for an nba team to have the best regular season record than win the championship?

It would be if that was the way the NBA title is assigned. As it only determines seeding, many good teams just save energy.

Also, in NBA teams tank to lose more game and get a better draft pick, while in soccer leagues there is relegation so worse teams still fight for the win because they need points. This makes every game a real challenge.

All this considered, NBA playoffs are still relatively easy to win for the best team because series are best of 7, so a lucky game is not enough for the underdog to win the series. In Champions League or European soccer league in general, playoff matches are 2 games only and the final is one single game.

[Sedale Threatt]

One thing, I don't mean to sound dismissive or insulting about Maradona's drug problem. It's not a moral failing, but a maladaptive coping mechanism to deal with psychological trauma. Given how he grew up, it would be more notable if he wasn't. I have deep respect that he at least tried to tackle it later in life and seemed to have some success. He deserved that.

But it's part of the tapestry of his career, and is a huge blemish when you're trying to determine who is the best player in the history of the world's most popular sport.

[Yinwest]

Maradona was amazing, absolutely fantastic peak (I'd say top 5 ever, at least, for soccer history), but a somewhat short/disappointing career due to drug use/off court stuff... still, search for his highlights in the 1986 world cup, he basically willed Argentina to a title, one of the greatest carry jobs ever... and that's coming from a brazilian (you may already know the Brazil x Argentina soccer rivalry...).

PS: I started following soccer back in 1984 or so, 1986 was the first world cup I remember watching... I saw it all when it happened, live and in color as they say here in Brazil.

People of my father’s generation said Maradona’s U20 world cup performance was even more amazing.

[wegotthabeet]

I think stuff like Champions league has far more roll of dice luck involved, for best team, I think domestic is easier to win, CL is far harder to win, but for more underdog team, CL title would be more likely to win, I assume, because you can luck out more, its not single elimination, its too leg play offs, but on good run, you could just roll on, where domestic league is a long marathon and would be very hard for non favorite to win. Thats why Lester winning Premier was so unlikely, if they won any cup, it wouldn't have been much of a story.

By this logic wouldn’t it be more difficult for an nba team to have the best regular season record than win the championship?

It would be if that was the way the NBA title is assigned. As it only determines seeding, many good teams just save energy.

Also, in NBA teams tank to lose more game and get a better draft pick, while in soccer leagues there is relegation so worse teams still fight for the win because they need points. This makes every game a real challenge.

All this considered, NBA playoffs are still relatively easy to win for the best team because series are best of 7, so a lucky game is not enough for the underdog to win the series. In Champions League or European soccer league in general, playoff matches are 2 games only and the final is one single game.

But champions league determines the best team in Europe right? Therefore should be the most sought after trophy to win. Sometimes the team that wins the superbowl only needs to three games technically, yet no one has a problem with that. Also more people watch the champion league finals than any other game unless it’s a World Cup year.

[Hellcrooner]

Shouldnt we have on account against Maradona. Not being able to win la liga with Barcelona which actuslky won It The year he left?

[bkkrh]

It took me a long ass time to realize yall weren’t talking about the pop star Madonna.

Is this like if bron went back to back in 15 and 16?

So you and Durden Tyler telling us you don't know, a probably top 3 most famous athlete of all time? Dudes, its passive agressive trolling, if you do not care for the comparison, do not comment, it is not hard. This forum is the only reason why I know who Ohtani is, I would never know who that is, but I learned it from here and I am happy, I know more, I don't go to Ohtani thread and troll how hes irrelevant to my eyes because he plays a weird sport to me.

0 trolling, I deadass just want to know the answer to the question I asked and if people think Ronaldo better than him because that’s the best player I seen. I just watched on YouTube a little and I can’t tell.

I grew up watching Maradona during his prime in the World Cups of the 80s. To give you some context. FIFA (the global football federation) made a "player of the century" voting in 2000. It was based on online voting through fans. Maradona got 53.6% of the votes, Pelé came in second with 18.5% and was the only other player to get a 2 digit voting result.

But since FIFA is FIFA they made a second poll consisting of journalists, officials and coaches and there Pelé won by a landslide. So they were both announced as footballers of the century.

The argument that was used was that many fans had seen Maradona play, while most fans were too young to have watched Pelé. This made 0 sense since the 3rd and 8th place also went to players that were active at the same time than Pelé. Additionally by that logic you would assume that then currently active superstars would have placed high, while the highest then still active player Roberto Baggio came in 4th with only 5.4% of votes. All other still active or recent players scored less than 2% in the votes, this included players like Zidane, who was at his peak at that time.

Most believe that the real reason FIFA didn't want Maradona to be the single best player of the century were his scandals. He had a cocaine addiction for decades, he was banned to play football for certain periods because of failed doping tests. He went to rehab in Cuba and Castro became his friend. So FIFA prefered the "cleaner" Pelé as face of football.

If you are interested in football or not, I totally recommend you to watch a documentary about Maradona's life. He is definitely one of the most interesting characters that ever lifed, unrelated to sports. One of his most prominent moments was in the quarterfinals of the 1986 World Cup. Argentina won 2-1 against England. Maradona scored both goals for Argentina. The first is the most infamous goal of all time, since he used his hand. When he was asked after the game about that he said it was "the hand of god" that scored that goal. The second goal was the goal of the century. I can't think of any other professional athlete that had so many highs and lows in his life. He is the definition of the mad genius.

Watch on YouTube

[KGtabake]

Maradona.
The equivalent in the current era would be the New Orleans Pelicans or the Memphis Grizzlies to win 2 titles in 4 seasons.
Napoli won again 2 years ago.
32 years after Maradona. The Italian league nowadays isn't so strong like it was back then though.
Back then it was the top league in the world.