EPTI guess what we are discussing is how far out of an outlier these guys are. From a statistical point of view, assuming that talent/quality for high-training-level-players falls under a normal curve (and why wouldn't it), there is a reason to believe that today's outliers are further out from the median due to the much larger amount of players now having access to top level training compared to the 40's or 50's. The higher the overall sample, the higher the probable number of occurrences at each segment of the curve. I think there's good reason to believe Messi is more of an exceptional talent than Di Stefano was.
2014 - 2015 Football Thread - Page 11
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
I guess what we are discussing is how far out of an outlier these guys are. From a statistical point of view, assuming that talent/quality for high-training-level-players falls under a normal curve (and why wouldn't it), there is a reason to believe that today's outliers are further out from the median due to the much larger amount of players now having access to top level training compared to the 40's or 50's. The higher the overall sample, the higher the probable number of occurrences at each segment of the curve. I think there's good reason to believe Messi is more of an exceptional talent than Di Stefano was. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28714 Posts
| ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
Fun moves are fun, but in today's game they don't really make you win. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18525 Posts
On July 08 2014 22:55 warding wrote: Ronaldinho was extremely fun to watch but I don't think he was in any way ahead of Messi overall. I guess what we are discussing is how far out of an outlier these guys are. From a statistical point of view, assuming that talent/quality for high-training-level-players falls under a normal curve (and why wouldn't it), there is a reason to believe that today's outliers are further out from the median due to the much larger amount of players now having access to top level training compared to the 40's or 50's. The higher the overall sample, the higher the probable number of occurrences at each segment of the curve. I think there's good reason to believe Messi is more of an exceptional talent than Di Stefano was. Di Stefano got the ball from the goalkeeper, organised defense, was the heart of the midfield plus an astounding striker. Messi is an offensive god but Di Stefano was a football god. I don't think these two players are even comparable. ^^ Di Stefano was total football before the term was even invented | ||
|
LeLfe
France3160 Posts
On July 08 2014 23:02 warding wrote: A lot of those moves are either useless or too risky. Cristiano Ronaldo used to be more fun and attempt more 1on1s, but then he chose to work on being efficient and that's when the 40+ goal seasons started appearing. Fun moves are fun, but in today's game they don't really make you win. Risk is everything | ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On July 08 2014 23:07 sharkie wrote: Di Stefano got the ball from the goalkeeper, organised defense, was the heart of the midfield plus an astounding striker. Messi is an offensive god but Di Stefano was a football god. I don't think these two players are even comparable. ^^ Di Stefano was total football before the term was even invented Exactly lol. When a guy can go from one end of the pitch to the other being John Terry/Kompany/Hummels + Pirlo/Gerrard/Xavi + Ronaldo/Messi/Gerd Muller into one then you #Respect said person! | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On July 08 2014 23:07 sharkie wrote: Di Stefano got the ball from the goalkeeper, organised defense, was the heart of the midfield plus an astounding striker. Messi is an offensive god but Di Stefano was a football god. I don't think these two players are even comparable. ^^ Di Stefano was total football before the term was even invented You're not really addressing my argument. You can't compare them as football players, but you can make the argument that Messi is more of an outlier than Di Stefano given the much larger sample of pro players we have today. Plus, the fact that Di Stefano did all those things tells more about football at that era compared to today than about the overall quality of Di Stefano vs Messi or anyone in this era. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
| ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On July 08 2014 23:38 warding wrote: You're not really addressing my argument. You can't compare them as football players, but you can make the argument that Messi is more of an outlier than Di Stefano given the much larger sample of pro players we have today. Plus, the fact that Di Stefano did all those things tells more about football at that era compared to today than about the overall quality of Di Stefano vs Messi or anyone in this era. Would you argue Esuiebo was the same then? Just someone who was good in his day because players were worst and weren't as many professionals? | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On July 08 2014 23:43 Pandemona wrote: Would you argue Esuiebo was the same then? Just someone who was good in his day because players were worst and weren't as many professionals? Yes. My argument is that it is likely that is Messi is further out as an outlier than outstanding players in earlier eras were. I don't think I'm dis'ing Eusébio or Di Stefano in any way. | ||
|
Rookie6
Brazil583 Posts
Who knows what would happen if Maradona, Pele, Di Stefano were born today, maybe they would be even better, or maybe they wouldn't. If Messi played in that era, he could be the best player in the world or he could be a nobody. You can argue they have talent and the right genes or whatever, but you also need the right environment to let the talent develop, and today there are more options and techniques for this to happen. There is no way to say anything because there are sooo many variables. The only thing we can try to compare is how much that player had an impact in the game played at the time. And Maradona, Pele, Di Stefano and Messi had a lot of impact. (Argentina pretty good I would say xD) | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Could Muhamad Ali of tamed a Klitchsko in his prime? Could Mike Tyson/Lenox Lewis go toe to toe with Ali and Foreman? These are the questions that everyone has a view on but no one ever brings up, well they fought in a time without really hardcore training so they werent fighting top elite level athletes. No, but they still swung their arms as hard as they could to try and knock eachother out. They also didn't get as much protection in terms of gloves and what not. Like Zeo said, Di Stefano and Eusiebo etcetc did what they did whilst getting tackled by the most severe of challenges and still carrying on. They were getting kneed into the back like Neymar was every second of the game, let alone once a blue moon like we see today. Also playing on terrible pitches and still bringing "samba" like style to the game shows more than class it shows brilliance. To do that with a ball as heavy as a medicine ball and mud pitches holding it up would of been brilliant to see. Not saying Messi and Ronaldo couldn't do the same thing back then as we would never know the differences, but to completely rule it out is bad and unfair. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28714 Posts
like picture natural footballing ability being one of those standard deviation curves that you see for IQ tests or whatever (I dunno fucking math so bear with me) and then you have 80% of people within 10% of the median or whatever, for someone to be Di Stefano dominant in Di Stefano's era he only had to be like a 0.0001% outlier, whereas for messi to be as dominant as he is today, he has to be a 0.0000001% outlier. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Like i mentioned, you have pitches being mud baths also the ball being medicine ball weight like, then the biggest, players kick the shite out of you for fun if you go passed them. You can see many videos from World Cups alone of crap that went unpunished the most noteable one is; Battiston vs Schumacher.....i mean LOL that not a penalty let alone red card and suspended for a few games lol! Battiston was sparked out as well, needed oxygen and everything. Yet referee didn't do a thing ^_^ Also horrible Platini was in that France team who witnessed that! | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On July 08 2014 23:54 Pandemona wrote: Well would you say the same about boxing then? Could Muhamad Ali of tamed a Klitchsko in his prime? Could Mike Tyson/Lenox Lewis go toe to toe with Ali and Foreman? These are the questions that everyone has a view on but no one ever brings up, well they fought in a time without really hardcore training so they werent fighting top elite level athletes. No, but they still swung their arms as hard as they could to try and knock eachother out. They also didn't get as much protection in terms of gloves and what not. Like Zeo said, Di Stefano and Eusiebo etcetc did what they did whilst getting tackled by the most severe of challenges and still carrying on. They were getting kneed into the back like Neymar was every second of the game, let alone once a blue moon like we see today. Also playing on terrible pitches and still bringing "samba" like style to the game shows more than class it shows brilliance. To do that with a ball as heavy as a medicine ball and mud pitches holding it up would of been brilliant to see. Not saying Messi and Ronaldo couldn't do the same thing back then as we would never know the differences, but to completely rule it out is bad and unfair. My argument is purely based on a statistical view of things. I don't know if it holds for boxing - are there more pro boxers today than in the 60's and 70's? Here, I made a drawing to try to show what I mean more clearly: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YsipTLc.png) The idea is that the curves have the same shape, but since today's curve is much larger - since there are so many more professional players training at top level - standing out today among all of them means you're further out as an outlier than before. | ||
|
Rookie6
Brazil583 Posts
On July 08 2014 23:55 Liquid`Drone wrote: agree with warding. it's much more impressive to be dominant today than to be dominant before because professionalism and practice regimes actually make "natural talent" much less of a factor (which again makes it more of a factor because when everyone practices perfectly it becomes the separating factor- but before natural ability could be enough, now it's just necessary on top of practice)- and thus someone who is dominant today, like messi, has to be even more "off the charts". like picture natural footballing ability being one of those standard deviation curves that you see for IQ tests or whatever (I dunno fucking math so bear with me) and then you have 80% of people within 10% of the median or whatever, for someone to be Di Stefano dominant in Di Stefano's era he only had to be like a 0.0001% outlier, whereas for messi to be as dominant as he is today, he has to be a 0.0000001% outlier. I can agree it can be considered more impressive, but we cannot say Messi is "better". I can argue it is unfair to Di Stefano to be compared like this, because he did not have the chance to play today. Maybe, he would be a 0,000000000001% outlier. The thing is, we will never know. Both are out of this world though. | ||
|
GizmoPT
Portugal3040 Posts
dont compare different eras.. doesnt make any sense.. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On July 09 2014 00:08 warding wrote: My argument is purely based on a statistical view of things. I don't know if it holds for boxing - are there more pro boxers today than in the 60's and 70's? Here, I made a drawing to try to show what I mean more clearly: + Show Spoiler + The idea is that the curves have the same shape, but since today's curve is much larger - since there are so many more professional players training at top level - standing out today among all of them means you're further out as an outlier than before. Yeah i agree with that point but you still cannot classify whether or not he was better or worst than Messi of today is my argument that is all. What your saying about levels of players in todays game is completely true, to make it as a professional footballer now you have to some huge fucking talent or do something no one else can do. Whether it be run 100mph with the ball glued to your feet or cross a ball pin point accurately. On July 09 2014 00:11 GizmoPT wrote: by the end of the day we will have a scientific study here... wtf guys ? Di Stefano died and all you guys can argue is herp derp Messi is better derp by your logic maybe Bruma > Eusebio k thx and those graphics are subjective as hell lol dont compare different eras.. doesnt make any sense.. Pretty sure Eder > Eusebio? xDDDDDDDDDD | ||
|
GizmoPT
Portugal3040 Posts
On July 09 2014 00:20 Pandemona wrote: Yeah i agree with that point but you still cannot classify whether or not he was better or worst than Messi of today is my argument that is all. What your saying about levels of players in todays game is completely true, to make it as a professional footballer now you have to some huge fucking talent or do something no one else can do. Whether it be run 100mph with the ball glued to your feet or cross a ball pin point accurately. Pretty sure Eder > Eusebio? xDDDDDDDDDD maybe i mean you never know maybe back then Eder would have been the best player ever you never know right ? lol.. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6257 Posts
On July 09 2014 00:08 warding wrote: My argument is purely based on a statistical view of things. I don't know if it holds for boxing - are there more pro boxers today than in the 60's and 70's? Here, I made a drawing to try to show what I mean more clearly: The idea is that the curves have the same shape, but since today's curve is much larger - since there are so many more professional players training at top level - standing out today among all of them means you're further out as an outlier than before. That's cool and all but you're not mentioning that Di Stefano could be as much of an outlier as Messi on nearly the exact same spot of your x axis. That's kind of the whole discussion. Who is the bigger outlier and we simply do not know. | ||
| ||
