|
|
United States10298 Posts
On October 12 2023 02:38 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2023 01:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ya, but sharkie isn't saying hazard is Messi/Ronaldo level, just that his peak was at that level. There's no conflict between that, and saying what made messi/Ronaldo truly special is their consistency/longevity. Now i don't fully agree with it either way, I think more precise would be 'prolly would've deserved a ballondor if there was no messi/ronaldo', alternatively, that his peak was comparable to messi/ronaldos least impressive seasons (not even their average).
Also both RM and Barcelona had seasons where they won with 3 or fewer points. I think it is kind of hard to argue that mesdi/Ronaldo did not contribute by at least 3 points across a season.
Maybe I need to be clearer. In the world where neither Ronaldo nor Messi had existed then both Real and Barca would have won those titles. Obv. if only one of them was missing the other one would have totally dominated La Liga and CL.
Hard disagree. La Liga is not just Real and Barca. Athletico definitely could've stolen a few titles from them. I counted quite a handful of seasons where Athletico were within 10 points of winning La Liga during the tenure of both Ronaldo and Messi (09-18). And there were CL games where without Messi or Ronaldo, Barco/Real do not win the CL. This is some insane justification to downplay the accomplishments of Messi and Ronaldo just to prop Hazard up.
|
Atletico Madrid could have won easily two more Liga Liga easily during Messi/Ronaldo era. They were however unable to get points vs bottom 4 teams twice (1-2 wins of 8 games) in these two seasons when they were only 1-3 pts behind champion.
|
On October 13 2023 00:20 FlaShFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2023 02:38 sharkie wrote:On October 12 2023 01:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ya, but sharkie isn't saying hazard is Messi/Ronaldo level, just that his peak was at that level. There's no conflict between that, and saying what made messi/Ronaldo truly special is their consistency/longevity. Now i don't fully agree with it either way, I think more precise would be 'prolly would've deserved a ballondor if there was no messi/ronaldo', alternatively, that his peak was comparable to messi/ronaldos least impressive seasons (not even their average).
Also both RM and Barcelona had seasons where they won with 3 or fewer points. I think it is kind of hard to argue that mesdi/Ronaldo did not contribute by at least 3 points across a season.
Maybe I need to be clearer. In the world where neither Ronaldo nor Messi had existed then both Real and Barca would have won those titles. Obv. if only one of them was missing the other one would have totally dominated La Liga and CL. Hard disagree. La Liga is not just Real and Barca. Athletico definitely could've stolen a few titles from them. I counted quite a handful of seasons where Athletico were within 10 points of winning La Liga during the tenure of both Ronaldo and Messi (09-18). And there were CL games where without Messi or Ronaldo, Barco/Real do not win the CL. This is some insane justification to downplay the accomplishments of Messi and Ronaldo just to prop Hazard up.
WHERE AM I DOWNPLAYING MESSI OR RONALDO?
Sheesh you guys just do hating for the sake of hating on me
|
Hazard isn't even the best Belgian footballer of the past decade. That's De Bruyne.
|
Norway28739 Posts
That's arguably from longevity though. I think Hazard's best 2-3-4 seasons have been about De Bruyne level, but he's been at that level his entire City-stay. (Didn't watch him much in Wolfsburg but I heard great things then already.)
|
United States10298 Posts
On October 13 2023 01:28 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2023 00:20 FlaShFTW wrote:On October 12 2023 02:38 sharkie wrote:On October 12 2023 01:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ya, but sharkie isn't saying hazard is Messi/Ronaldo level, just that his peak was at that level. There's no conflict between that, and saying what made messi/Ronaldo truly special is their consistency/longevity. Now i don't fully agree with it either way, I think more precise would be 'prolly would've deserved a ballondor if there was no messi/ronaldo', alternatively, that his peak was comparable to messi/ronaldos least impressive seasons (not even their average).
Also both RM and Barcelona had seasons where they won with 3 or fewer points. I think it is kind of hard to argue that mesdi/Ronaldo did not contribute by at least 3 points across a season.
Maybe I need to be clearer. In the world where neither Ronaldo nor Messi had existed then both Real and Barca would have won those titles. Obv. if only one of them was missing the other one would have totally dominated La Liga and CL. Hard disagree. La Liga is not just Real and Barca. Athletico definitely could've stolen a few titles from them. I counted quite a handful of seasons where Athletico were within 10 points of winning La Liga during the tenure of both Ronaldo and Messi (09-18). And there were CL games where without Messi or Ronaldo, Barco/Real do not win the CL. This is some insane justification to downplay the accomplishments of Messi and Ronaldo just to prop Hazard up. WHERE AM I DOWNPLAYING MESSI OR RONALDO? Sheesh you guys just do hating for the sake of hating on me
No one is hating. We just think your take that Real and Barca win the same titles without Messi and Ronaldo is silly.
|
On October 13 2023 01:28 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2023 00:20 FlaShFTW wrote:On October 12 2023 02:38 sharkie wrote:On October 12 2023 01:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ya, but sharkie isn't saying hazard is Messi/Ronaldo level, just that his peak was at that level. There's no conflict between that, and saying what made messi/Ronaldo truly special is their consistency/longevity. Now i don't fully agree with it either way, I think more precise would be 'prolly would've deserved a ballondor if there was no messi/ronaldo', alternatively, that his peak was comparable to messi/ronaldos least impressive seasons (not even their average).
Also both RM and Barcelona had seasons where they won with 3 or fewer points. I think it is kind of hard to argue that mesdi/Ronaldo did not contribute by at least 3 points across a season.
Maybe I need to be clearer. In the world where neither Ronaldo nor Messi had existed then both Real and Barca would have won those titles. Obv. if only one of them was missing the other one would have totally dominated La Liga and CL. Hard disagree. La Liga is not just Real and Barca. Athletico definitely could've stolen a few titles from them. I counted quite a handful of seasons where Athletico were within 10 points of winning La Liga during the tenure of both Ronaldo and Messi (09-18). And there were CL games where without Messi or Ronaldo, Barco/Real do not win the CL. This is some insane justification to downplay the accomplishments of Messi and Ronaldo just to prop Hazard up. WHERE AM I DOWNPLAYING MESSI OR RONALDO? Sheesh you guys just do hating for the sake of hating on me
By comparing them to hazard and saying RM and BRC would still win without them you ARE downplaying them.
To entertain your bait, what do you mean by peak hazard?
His 2 or 3 best seasons - not comparable to the other 2
His best season - not comparable
His best month - still a no
His best game - hardly
His best half - not quite there but rose tainted glasses maybe?
His best 5 minutes - errr maybe
His best play - sure, if this is what you mean yes, a lot of players made highĺight worth plays in their career and scored goals or made a game changing play that made their team a level above. But nobody would say they were peak messi or cronaldo level.
|
On October 13 2023 15:37 KobraKay wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2023 01:28 sharkie wrote:On October 13 2023 00:20 FlaShFTW wrote:On October 12 2023 02:38 sharkie wrote:On October 12 2023 01:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ya, but sharkie isn't saying hazard is Messi/Ronaldo level, just that his peak was at that level. There's no conflict between that, and saying what made messi/Ronaldo truly special is their consistency/longevity. Now i don't fully agree with it either way, I think more precise would be 'prolly would've deserved a ballondor if there was no messi/ronaldo', alternatively, that his peak was comparable to messi/ronaldos least impressive seasons (not even their average).
Also both RM and Barcelona had seasons where they won with 3 or fewer points. I think it is kind of hard to argue that mesdi/Ronaldo did not contribute by at least 3 points across a season.
Maybe I need to be clearer. In the world where neither Ronaldo nor Messi had existed then both Real and Barca would have won those titles. Obv. if only one of them was missing the other one would have totally dominated La Liga and CL. Hard disagree. La Liga is not just Real and Barca. Athletico definitely could've stolen a few titles from them. I counted quite a handful of seasons where Athletico were within 10 points of winning La Liga during the tenure of both Ronaldo and Messi (09-18). And there were CL games where without Messi or Ronaldo, Barco/Real do not win the CL. This is some insane justification to downplay the accomplishments of Messi and Ronaldo just to prop Hazard up. WHERE AM I DOWNPLAYING MESSI OR RONALDO? Sheesh you guys just do hating for the sake of hating on me By comparing them to hazard and saying RM and BRC would still win without them you ARE downplaying them. To entertain your bait, what do you mean by peak hazard? His 2 or 3 best seasons - not comparable to the other 2 His best season - not comparable His best month - still a no His best game - hardly His best half - not quite there but rose tainted glasses maybe? His best 5 minutes - errr maybe His best play - sure, if this is what you mean yes, a lot of players made highĺight worth plays in their career and scored goals or made a game changing play that made their team a level above. But nobody would say they were peak messi or cronaldo level.
How am I downplaying them?
Was Real a hugely successful club winning tons of trophies before Ronaldo? Yes they were. Are they still winning trophies? Yes they are. Do they miss Ronaldo? For parts yes.
Was Barca a hugely successful club winning tons of trophies before Messi? Yes they were. Are they still winning trophies? Yes they are. Do they miss Messi? For parts yes.
Are Ronaldo and Messi still the greatest players football has ever seen? Yes they are. Nothing I have said changes that. But would Real and Barca still have won tons of trophies if they hadnt existed? FOR SURE.
|
thats the worst justification for peak hazard being at peak messi/cr7 level ive seen.
|
On October 13 2023 18:11 evilfatsh1t wrote:
thats the worst justification for peak hazard being at peak messi/cr7 level ive seen.
what justification? Where have I mentioned Hazard in my previous post?
|
the entire reason you brought up barca/rm and messi/cr7 was to point out that hazard was at their level
|
United States10298 Posts
On October 13 2023 17:46 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2023 15:37 KobraKay wrote:On October 13 2023 01:28 sharkie wrote:On October 13 2023 00:20 FlaShFTW wrote:On October 12 2023 02:38 sharkie wrote:On October 12 2023 01:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ya, but sharkie isn't saying hazard is Messi/Ronaldo level, just that his peak was at that level. There's no conflict between that, and saying what made messi/Ronaldo truly special is their consistency/longevity. Now i don't fully agree with it either way, I think more precise would be 'prolly would've deserved a ballondor if there was no messi/ronaldo', alternatively, that his peak was comparable to messi/ronaldos least impressive seasons (not even their average).
Also both RM and Barcelona had seasons where they won with 3 or fewer points. I think it is kind of hard to argue that mesdi/Ronaldo did not contribute by at least 3 points across a season.
Maybe I need to be clearer. In the world where neither Ronaldo nor Messi had existed then both Real and Barca would have won those titles. Obv. if only one of them was missing the other one would have totally dominated La Liga and CL. Hard disagree. La Liga is not just Real and Barca. Athletico definitely could've stolen a few titles from them. I counted quite a handful of seasons where Athletico were within 10 points of winning La Liga during the tenure of both Ronaldo and Messi (09-18). And there were CL games where without Messi or Ronaldo, Barco/Real do not win the CL. This is some insane justification to downplay the accomplishments of Messi and Ronaldo just to prop Hazard up. WHERE AM I DOWNPLAYING MESSI OR RONALDO? Sheesh you guys just do hating for the sake of hating on me By comparing them to hazard and saying RM and BRC would still win without them you ARE downplaying them. To entertain your bait, what do you mean by peak hazard? His 2 or 3 best seasons - not comparable to the other 2 His best season - not comparable His best month - still a no His best game - hardly His best half - not quite there but rose tainted glasses maybe? His best 5 minutes - errr maybe His best play - sure, if this is what you mean yes, a lot of players made highĺight worth plays in their career and scored goals or made a game changing play that made their team a level above. But nobody would say they were peak messi or cronaldo level. How am I downplaying them? Was Real a hugely successful club winning tons of trophies before Ronaldo? Yes they were. Are they still winning trophies? Yes they are. Do they miss Ronaldo? For parts yes. Was Barca a hugely successful club winning tons of trophies before Messi? Yes they were. Are they still winning trophies? Yes they are. Do they miss Messi? For parts yes. Are Ronaldo and Messi still the greatest players football has ever seen? Yes they are. Nothing I have said changes that. But would Real and Barca still have won tons of trophies if they hadnt existed? FOR SURE.
This is just a fallacy to say that X player's impact on a team is lowered simply because Y team would have won trophies anyway. Your argument boils down to: Real and Barca won IN SPITE OF Messi and Ronaldo, rather than they won BECAUSE OF Messi and Ronaldo. A team winning trophies before a player joins them doesn't diminish that player's legacy. If this argument followed, then any player ever who plays for those teams will always have their accomplishments diminished because that team will always win trophies in the future anyways. You don't need to go play for a weak team and bring them to glory simply to bolster your reputation.
Guess what, Chelsea still went on to win another UCL without Hazard, and they won UCLs and PLs before Hazard. Does that diminish his accomplishment with Chelsea?
|
I never said X player's impact on a team is lowered
|
Northern Ireland26242 Posts
On October 14 2023 05:49 sharkie wrote:
I never said X player's impact on a team is lowered
What did you say then?
|
On October 14 2023 10:19 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2023 05:49 sharkie wrote:
I never said X player's impact on a team is lowered What did you say then?
Was Real a hugely successful club winning tons of trophies before Ronaldo? Yes they were. Are they still winning trophies? Yes they are. Do they miss Ronaldo? For parts yes.
Was Barca a hugely successful club winning tons of trophies before Messi? Yes they were. Are they still winning trophies? Yes they are. Do they miss Messi? For parts yes.
Are Ronaldo and Messi still the greatest players football has ever seen? Yes they are. Nothing I have said changes that. But would Real and Barca still have won tons of trophies if they hadnt existed? FOR SURE.
|
Cpt. America 
|
|
|
Well Berhalter needs to be loaded into a cannon and fired into the fucking Sun. He is as worthless as a $3 dollar bill... but hey that's what nepotism gets you.
|
Its a friendly game, would not read too much into it, no matter how it ends.
|
On October 15 2023 03:07 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2023 10:19 WombaT wrote:On October 14 2023 05:49 sharkie wrote:
I never said X player's impact on a team is lowered What did you say then? Was Real a hugely successful club winning tons of trophies before Ronaldo? Yes they were. Are they still winning trophies? Yes they are. Do they miss Ronaldo? For parts yes. Was Barca a hugely successful club winning tons of trophies before Messi? Yes they were. Are they still winning trophies? Yes they are. Do they miss Messi? For parts yes. Are Ronaldo and Messi still the greatest players football has ever seen? Yes they are. Nothing I have said changes that. But would Real and Barca still have won tons of trophies if they hadnt existed? FOR SURE.
Top teams naturally draw and nurture top players to greatness. So if CR7 or Messi didn't exist, Real Madrid and Barca would still be winning trophies with the CR7 and Messi variants of an alternate universe.
You're either stating the obvious, or making no point at all.
The comparison with Hazard is laughable. The fact that CR7 won more trophies and achieved much more personal glory than Hazard in Real Madrid speaks for itself. The comparison is not even close.
And as someone earlier correctly dismantled the 'peak' analysis, how do you even measure 'peak' anyway? Player of the match? Month? League? Season? Well, there are already awards for that. Which CR7 and Messi have each won many more than Hazard. It's only worthwhile comparing peak performances of players of the same level (CR7 v Messi). Hazard is not at their level, and any comparison is a waste of time.
P.S. And I'm saying all this as someone who enjoys watching a highlight reel of Hazard's skillz than CR7's goals any day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
