Having Maradona at his peak in your team was like playing with a cheat code
Messi is better than maradona....
- Thread starter VoetbalWizard
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
So, your opinion is invalid...yet you still have such a strong opinion. That makes sense. WUMs tend to get tangled up in their own nonsense but it has to be a pretty weak wind up for it to unravel so quickly.
When he was 21 Pele played over 100 games in a season, over 20 European games in a month. Maradona played against Tassotti-Baresi-Costacurta-Maldini, Messi plays against Arbeloa-Ramos-Pepe-Marcelo, and he got kicked to shit. His ankle was so badly broken, and the treatment available to him was so much worse, that he had to wear one boot two sizes bigger than the other. It's swings and roundabouts.
What site do you download stuff from Brwned? I'd love to see a game of that Milan defense 
Half of them were friendlies. The defenses weren't not even near todays level and defenders were not as much hard as today. Tactically football was in the infantile stage.
These 'friendlies' weren't friendlies, and yes, defensively the game has improved since then, but it goes both ways. In some ways the game was more difficult (worse pitches and balls, more lenient refereeing) and in some ways the game was easier (slower pace, worse defending/goalkeeping, less tactical).
Adexkola - fbtz, I told you already! It's not allowing new registrations. There's bound to be games on youtube if you look. The classic Milan thrashing of Madrid for one.
Adexkola - fbtz, I told you already! It's not allowing new registrations. There's bound to be games on youtube if you look. The classic Milan thrashing of Madrid for one.
Explain it.
Be honest, do you think that Pele could have managed to score 50 goals per season in today's European football?
Yes, absolutely. And he'd do so while showing an infinitely more impressive all-round game than Ronaldo. Assuming he was born in 1990 instead of 1940 and thus was brought up with all of the facilities available to the modern day footballer of course.
It could be. I never seen an entire game of him.
He'd also be superior to Messi as well.
give us a shot of that crystal ball
Fair enough. I don't remember exactly how good they were pre-Maradona but they weren't any better than mid-table and I don't even think they were a good mid-table team. If you put Messi in Everton's team, would they win the league twice? I doubt it.
Football has changed enough to make these comparisons pretty much meaningless.
What site do you download stuff from Brwned? I'd love to see a game of that Milan defense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PbUKcqxLxw&feature=related
Especially Pele to Messi.
I'd call Pele the greatest of the pre-modern era. Pele simply cannot be compared to Messi and I'd even say he cannot be compared to Maradona either.
My rational for this is simple. Pele played in an era that by today's standards would be called amateur in regards to the type of training they did, both sport and non sport specific.
My contention then is the following. Pele played in an era when raw natural talent mattered more than anything. This is like playing sports as a kid/early teen. I'm sure we all knew at least one kid out there who was miles better than anyone else and they went on to do absolutely feck all in sports. The reason for that is the adage, "hard work beats talent when talent refuses to work hard".
With modern strength and conditioning, players who would have had no business lacing Pele's boots, may very well physically dominate him in the modern game if Pele turned out to be a lazy sob.
Does anyone know for certain that Pele would have spent hours in the gym before or after practice working on his explosiveness via deadlifts, cleans and snatches and working on his endurance? Doing what he needed to do, so that less talented guys didn't surpass him physically to such an extent that his natural talent didn't matter?
Maradona had to deal with that. Messi has to deal with that. Pele not so much if at all. We could play all the whatifs we want, but simply put, the modern game is so much different to the game Pele played, I just don't see it as a valid comparison.
Err.... you're clearly not aware of Pele's physical attributes. Like Maradona, he was stronger than Messi, outright. With a far, far superior leap. His explosiveness off the mark is comparable to Messi's and his top-end speed as a youngster, or even to Messi's age now, was superior. If anything, the only thing modern training methods would do is enhance his physical superiority further.
I'm not going to drag out a Pele discussion here, but I will say he is the most shit upon [great] player there is on this site as people constantly state, with no clue, this or that about him in order to downplay his ability and standing in the game. It's cringe-worthy and smacks of incredible amounts of ignorance about the game and standard of play at the time.
Amateur football, indeed.
Remarkable then that Pele was such a superb physical specimen despite his lack of modern training. I don't see how a freak who could run 100m in under 11 seconds, had a fantastic spring and possessed a heavily muscled overall frame would be physically dominated by anyone.
Yes, we do know. He was a fantastic trainer, way ahead of his time in that sense when you look at how Garrincha or Best looked after themselves.
Gio could Pele really run 100m in under 11 secs, if so that is mightily impressive
Although some of Pele's "records" are a bit suspect, he was lightning and 11 seconds is not that far-fetched.
My old man who's seen the lot play reckons Pele is the GOAT, then Maradonna and then Messi and CR. But then again, he might be biased. I've not seen Pele play so not really in a position to comment but the footage I have seen, the man was a beast so to suggest he'd have been 'bossed' in todays game is just utter rubbish.
lol@Pele having a heavily muscled frame.
When I read threads about 165 pound players being called "tanks" I die a little inside. It seems the majority of people around here confuse a low percentage of body fat with being heavily muscled.
Valencia has been called a beast FFS.
I played highschool basketball with kids who had a more impressive and imposing body than Pele in that picture.
11 second 100 meters freaky? Are you kidding me. There are 15 year old boys who can run that. I was a 6'3 200 pound wide receiver and I was in the 11.5-11.8 range. Oh and I'm super white, If I was black that would be like running 11s
If you think a naturally athletic person being more physically impressive than less athletic people who don't weight train is astonishing, wait till you see me pull a rabbit out of a hat.
I don't any of you have any idea what kind of work modern athletes put in off the pitch or whatever playing surface they use to reach the heights of their sport. When Pele played people actually thought that muscles slowed you down and restricted mobility, agility and flexibility. This is something that even today still has legs with people who post here.
"He needs to bulk up"
"hopefully he won't slow down or lose his agility"
Really?
Let's not even talk about the state of the players he was playing against. I'd be fearful of playing with a grown man rocking 12 inch pythons, and a sunken chest.
Messi and Maradona played against finely tuned professional athletes whose bodies were operating near their absolute maximum capacity. If you want to argue that Pele naturally had the physical gifts I'll let you have that, I'll maintain that the men he played against were by and large no where near their maximum potential.
That is why it is stupid to compare Pele to Maradona or Messi. Oh and again for people getting their panties in a bunch. I am not saying Pele is not the greatest ever. All I am saying is that comparing like to like, there is too much difference between the games to compare Pele to Maradona or Messi. There was a revolution in the late 60's and 70's in sport training that completely changed how athletes train and prepare.
There is a reason why Olympic type events continually have their records dropped. There is a reason why there are 15 and 16 year old kids today that can produce times faster than the fastest ADULT MEN in the world from the 1950's.
When I read threads about 165 pound players being called "tanks" I die a little inside. It seems the majority of people around here confuse a low percentage of body fat with being heavily muscled.
Valencia has been called a beast FFS.
I played highschool basketball with kids who had a more impressive and imposing body than Pele in that picture.
11 second 100 meters freaky? Are you kidding me. There are 15 year old boys who can run that. I was a 6'3 200 pound wide receiver and I was in the 11.5-11.8 range. Oh and I'm super white, If I was black that would be like running 11s
If you think a naturally athletic person being more physically impressive than less athletic people who don't weight train is astonishing, wait till you see me pull a rabbit out of a hat.
I don't any of you have any idea what kind of work modern athletes put in off the pitch or whatever playing surface they use to reach the heights of their sport. When Pele played people actually thought that muscles slowed you down and restricted mobility, agility and flexibility. This is something that even today still has legs with people who post here.
"He needs to bulk up"
"hopefully he won't slow down or lose his agility"
Really?
Let's not even talk about the state of the players he was playing against. I'd be fearful of playing with a grown man rocking 12 inch pythons, and a sunken chest.
Messi and Maradona played against finely tuned professional athletes whose bodies were operating near their absolute maximum capacity. If you want to argue that Pele naturally had the physical gifts I'll let you have that, I'll maintain that the men he played against were by and large no where near their maximum potential.
That is why it is stupid to compare Pele to Maradona or Messi. Oh and again for people getting their panties in a bunch. I am not saying Pele is not the greatest ever. All I am saying is that comparing like to like, there is too much difference between the games to compare Pele to Maradona or Messi. There was a revolution in the late 60's and 70's in sport training that completely changed how athletes train and prepare.
There is a reason why Olympic type events continually have their records dropped. There is a reason why there are 15 and 16 year old kids today that can produce times faster than the fastest ADULT MEN in the world from the 1950's.
Err.... you're clearly not aware of Pele's physical attributes. Like Maradona, he was stronger than Messi, outright. With a far, far superior leap. His explosiveness off the mark is comparable to Messi's and his top-end speed as a youngster, or even to Messi's age now, was superior. If anything, the only thing modern training methods would do is enhance his physical superiority further.
I'm not going to drag out a Pele discussion here, but I will say he is the most shit upon [great] player there is on this site as people constantly state, with no clue, this or that about him in order to downplay his ability and standing in the game. It's cringe-worthy and smacks of incredible amounts of ignorance about the game and standard of play at the time.
Amateur football, indeed.
Again, I didn't call the football amateur. I called the training amateur. This results in a standard of play that while technically is fine, is completely different in the athletic standard.
Physically speaking, and I have seen plenty of Pele footage, Pele stands out only as much as a naturally athletic black guy stands out.
In highschool I played with and against black guys who didn't lift weights and had 35-40 inch vertical leaps and were super quick and explosive. In football again I played with and against black guys who didn't lift weights who had similar vertical leaps, two of which had 11s ish 100M times.
After high school I played football with guys who were bigger, to the tune of 40 or 50 pounds who had 30-35 inch vertical leaps and 4.4-4.5 second 40 yard times and could change direction on a dime at full speed.
What is the disconnect here? There is no shame for Pele in understanding and accepting these facts.
It is a fact that the training then was amateurish compared to today.
It is a fact that Pele competed against guys whose bodies were no where near their maximum potential.
If Brwnd is right and Pele was strength training in the 1950's as revolutionary he may have been, it weakens his case for GOAT in my eyes. The reason is simple. It was not an equal playing field. It would literally be a man playing amongst boys. Had weight strength training been the norm, which it was not, and Pele was not just one of the very few doing it, draw your own conclusions.
I agree.
lol@Pele having a heavily muscled frame.
When I read threads about 165 pound players being called "tanks" I die a little inside. It seems the majority of people around here confuse a low percentage of body fat with being heavily muscled.
Valencia has been called a beast FFS.
I played highschool basketball with kids who had a more impressive and imposing body than Pele in that picture.
11 second 100 meters freaky? Are you kidding me. There are 15 year old boys who can run that. I was a 6'3 200 pound wide receiver and I was in the 11.5-11.8 range. Oh and I'm super white, If I was black that would be like running 11s
You're comparing footballers with basketball, american football players and others who don't have to cover 10,000m+ per game. I'm sure we had this discussion before when you criticised those who fawned over the physiques of sprinters because they weren't on par with bodybuilders or pure strength athletes. The reason very few footballers run sub-11 100m is because football generally only requires sprints of 10-30m. They're unable to maintain a top speed after 40m or so and lose several tenths in the closing stages. Saying therefore that Pele had an impressive physique is a relative statement much like you'd say the same about Didier Drogba or Maria Mutola.
You cannot come in and accuse others of ignorance when you've raised concerns over how physically under-developed Pele was and his aptitude for training. Anyway, I train with Olympic athletes and am well aware of the work that goes on in the gym.
lol@Pele having a heavily muscled frame.
When I read threads about 165 pound players being called "tanks" I die a little inside. It seems the majority of people around here confuse a low percentage of body fat with being heavily muscled.
Valencia has been called a beast FFS.
I played highschool basketball with kids who had a more impressive and imposing body than Pele in that picture.
11 second 100 meters freaky? Are you kidding me. There are 15 year old boys who can run that. I was a 6'3 200 pound wide receiver and I was in the 11.5-11.8 range. Oh and I'm super white, If I was black that would be like running 11s
If you think a naturally athletic person being more physically impressive than less athletic people who don't weight train is astonishing, wait till you see me pull a rabbit out of a hat.
I don't any of you have any idea what kind of work modern athletes put in off the pitch or whatever playing surface they use to reach the heights of their sport. When Pele played people actually thought that muscles slowed you down and restricted mobility, agility and flexibility. This is something that even today still has legs with people who post here.
"He needs to bulk up"
"hopefully he won't slow down or lose his agility"
Really?
Let's not even talk about the state of the players he was playing against. I'd be fearful of playing with a grown man rocking 12 inch pythons, and a sunken chest.
Messi and Maradona played against finely tuned professional athletes whose bodies were operating near their absolute maximum capacity. If you want to argue that Pele naturally had the physical gifts I'll let you have that, I'll maintain that the men he played against were by and large no where near their maximum potential.
That is why it is stupid to compare Pele to Maradona or Messi. Oh and again for people getting their panties in a bunch. I am not saying Pele is not the greatest ever. All I am saying is that comparing like to like, there is too much difference between the games to compare Pele to Maradona or Messi. There was a revolution in the late 60's and 70's in sport training that completely changed how athletes train and prepare.
There is a reason why Olympic type events continually have their records dropped. There is a reason why there are 15 and 16 year old kids today that can produce times faster than the fastest ADULT MEN in the world from the 1950's.
You are all over the place with both your reasoning and your application of other sports to football. Even from a physical POV, and what makes a player in football a "powerhouse," and then trying to contrast that with outright power-based sports, you're way out there. Then you talk about lineal times and achievements in Olympic events that have absolutely no place in a discussion about football for the simple reason that footballers require numerous attributes across a myriad of factors, all encased in vital variables that make the game so unique, which is also the reason why every player is equal on a football pitch be they 5 foot 4 inches or 6 foot 6... and why the 'best ever' lists are dominated by players who don't even reach 5' 10" and are nowhere near 200lbs.
Paco Gento, of 1950's Real Madrid, would leave 95% of wingers in the PL (or any league) for dust in a foot race, with or without the ball... going back to the 1930's, we have Josef Bican who was said to be able to run 100m in 10.8. Even if that's out by a bit, it means he'd still give anyone active today a challenge in a footrace. The likes of Edwards, Nordahl, Lofthouse or even going back further to the 30's with Dixie Dean, would be physical beasts in the modern game. Why? Because, as much as you'd like to think things have changed so dramatically in this sport, you'll be very surprised to find out that they haven't. I can match every single fast or powerful player of today with one from 30+ years ago. Football is not linear and it does not carry strength and speed improvements like the sports you listed. It's an ability-based sport first and foremost, ergo, this will always be the most vital attribute for a footballer to have irrespective of height or weight.
What you never even considered was the difference in apparatus and rules players from the past had compared to now. How fast or explosive do you reckon Messi would be with those old clunky boots on on a rain-soaked bog of a pitch, or even a pitch with uneven or lengthened grass (Barcelona cry their eyes out when opposing teams grow the grass a few inches higher, ffs)? How do you think he would fare with two man-markers on him, or even one, or with the fact they could tackle him from behind all game long with nary a bat of an eyelid from the ref? How about two-footed tackles, or studs up "challenges" for the ball intended to take out the man? All this should be disregarded?
Every time I think about the displacement of players from one era to the other, I think everything is set up for those from the past to shine in the modern game and those from the present to absolutely shirk games in such "inhumane" conditions.
Iniesta, Xavi and Messi are not superior physically to thousands of footballers who went before them decades ago, and yet they sit atop the footballing tree. Cristiano Ronaldo may be a physical specimen in the modern game, but yet he's no more impressive with his feats than Eusebio, who played 40 years ago and would be a marvel with his combination of power and speed in today's game. Where you have a point, though, is that conditioning is different and endurance is boosted because of that, but that is, imo, countered by how much tougher those players were and how much more they had to endure during 90 minutes than players do now.
And by the by, I wouldn't say there was a tangible leap in the mean fitness and conditioning of players until the 90's. Mexico '86 is at no point faster than Mexico '70 and if you watch the European Cup final United played in '68, it is comfortably faster than both, which is due to the heat. If there was a World Cup played with the same conditions as WC '70 or '86 with the same substitution rules and a general lack of squad rotation, it would be no faster than either of them.
I feel all of this is a digression. The bare bones of it is Messi has no physical advantage over either Pele or Maradona (or Cruyff, or Best for that matter), he doesn't play in a stronger league or under any oppressive conditions, and, he has protection the other two could only ever dream of having.
I'd very much like to leave Pele out of the discussion, mind. I only interjected on that score because he was again being shitted on (for the millionth time.) This thread is about Maradona and Messi. I think it should be kept that way.
I literally have no idea where you are going - or trying to go - with this post. And randomly (or not) drawing race into the equation is a bizarre thing to do.
It's a very base line of thought to think you can determine power or pace in a footballing sense via visual appearance, or because a player is black
, also. I listed two of the fastest top-rated wide-men in Bican and Gento. Go have a Google at their physiques and tell me how 'fast' they look like they should be by your logical measure.. you can also do the same for Giggs of the 90's or a whole bunch of powerhouses relative to the sport we're talking about. The same goes for strength. Let's use Duncan Ferguson and Elokobi as physical subjects for this one... you go ahead and tell me, judging from their physiques, which one of the two is the most powerful...Its pretty meaningless to compare people from different eras to be fair. If Pele was grown up with modern days training and diets etc, he would probably be a different player.
If Pele had today's training, facilities, crew of sports scientists, dieticians, referee protections, etc... He'd have been probably even more impressive. Saying that he would be bossed around today is quite bizarre given all the advantages available to improve his overall conditioning. He bossed people back then, he'd shit on teams now even more spectacularly.
I think it's silly to say that Pele might have struggled with the modern game. While the defending probably wasn't as organised back then, a lot else was in favor of defenders as well such as officiating. Attackers didn't get the same protection they get these days. Look at Messi and Ronaldo, the slightest clip of the heels and defenders are on trouble. Also without the telly you could get away with the sort of stuff off the ball that you wouldn't now as well.
In the end, you have to compare one with their own peers. And from everything I've read, Pele towered over his. If the game is indeed a completely different animal there's no harm in dividing the game into a pre-modern and modern era. But that doesn't mean the pre-modern players weren't every bit as good as the modern one. It just means facilitating a comparison is impossible.
In the end, you have to compare one with their own peers. And from everything I've read, Pele towered over his. If the game is indeed a completely different animal there's no harm in dividing the game into a pre-modern and modern era. But that doesn't mean the pre-modern players weren't every bit as good as the modern one. It just means facilitating a comparison is impossible.
This is why comparisons across generations are so pointless per se. People spending hours over hypotheticals speculating wildly. How can anyone say with certainty how Pele would fare in the modern game? Specially when you say such a great player would fare poorly..
We used to refer to this sort of speculation as slacking back in college...I never understood it then either
I remember in the early 80s when Maradona's greatness was on the ascent, people had a hard time digesting that he could be as good as Pele - who at the time was considered the best of all time. I feel that we're in a similar situation now with Messi. Because he's still playing and with many years still to go, people have a hard to coming to grips with the fact that he may already be the greatest ever, because his story is still unfolding and can't yet compete with the Mystique of Maradona's legend.
.....or di Stefano's legend. All a bit stupid really. You can onlybe the best in your own era. To compare eras is futile because there are pros and cons in either. but to suggest that Pele couldn't cope with today's conditions/tactics/physical side of the game is beyond stupid. He would've enjoyed today's conditioning, protection from refs, medical advances etc etc.....he had the magic, dedication and professionalism and general nous and the toughness to cop what was dished out to him. Players today are conditioned to be faster and stronger but not more skilful - Pele would be faster and stronger.
in another 50 years we'll be hearing about how Pele could run 100m in less than a second where he would break the sound barrier and fans would go nuts.
Maradona would have to dodge bullets from snipers in the stands whilst he was player, and still carried his 10 supporting amateurs to glory.
Maradona would have to dodge bullets from snipers in the stands whilst he was player, and still carried his 10 supporting amateurs to glory.
Why is it you feel the need to talk down Maradona, Pele and co. every time? Surely great players should be admired, not mocked?
I think he is trying to emphasise who much romanticism is attached to past players. But I agree with your point in general Brwned.
Though I have seen past players (especially Pele!) being mocked quite often on these boards. Sure, he spouts a ton of shit, but as stated above he's probably one of the most "least respected" of the legends, when it comes to past greats of all time.
Maybe the fact that he's so utterly deluded and clueless in his opinions is detracting from his ability as a footballer? Who knows. My dad, who's seen them all play though, absolutely thinks Pele is the TGPOAT. I can't comment on these topics though, I've not seen enough of Pele or Maradonna!
Though I have seen past players (especially Pele!) being mocked quite often on these boards. Sure, he spouts a ton of shit, but as stated above he's probably one of the most "least respected" of the legends, when it comes to past greats of all time.
Maybe the fact that he's so utterly deluded and clueless in his opinions is detracting from his ability as a footballer? Who knows. My dad, who's seen them all play though, absolutely thinks Pele is the TGPOAT. I can't comment on these topics though, I've not seen enough of Pele or Maradonna!
Defenders were not as hard as today!!
Wow! I really don't know whether to laugh or cry! 
You must surely be too young to remember the defenders from the 60/70/80's. Defenders and midfielders were truly fearsome in those days, don't dismiss that as mere nostalgia Ismail, it was absolutely true. Messi gets knocked about a bit, but he certainly doesn't have people trying to break his legs every game!
Check out Andoni Goicochea or Gentile's treatment of Maradona, at a time when flair players did not get anywhere even remotely like the type of protection they get today. You had to almost axe someone to death before you got a red card in the 60's/70's!
Look at Pele's treatment in the 66 WC. Please do some research Ismail before you come out with crap like that. The organisation is better tactically now of course, but you didn't need as much in those days when you can kick someone 5 feet in the air to stop players, and you did so with relatively little risk of even receiving a yellow!
Who is the actual greatest is always going to be subjective, but one thing i hate is the young fans opinion that players from past generations would not still be amongst the best today.
I find that absolutely ludicrous. Players who shone then, on shit pitches, with no protection, using a medicine ball in boots that looked like steelies, can surely only be far better under today's near perfect conditions.
I think a question more pertinent is to whether today's little precious and pampered poodles would cope back when football was a proper man's game. It certainly was a different game back then, where skill still shone, but you needed to be tough to survive.
I find that absolutely ludicrous. Players who shone then, on shit pitches, with no protection, using a medicine ball in boots that looked like steelies, can surely only be far better under today's near perfect conditions.
I think a question more pertinent is to whether today's little precious and pampered poodles would cope back when football was a proper man's game. It certainly was a different game back then, where skill still shone, but you needed to be tough to survive.
Defenders were not as hard as today!!
You must surely be too young to remember the defenders from the 60/70/80's. Defenders and midfielders were truly fearsome in those days, don't dismiss that as mere nostalgia Ismail, it was absolutely true. Messi gets knocked about a bit, but he certainly doesn't have people trying to break his legs every game!
Check out Andoni Goicochea or Gentile's treatment of Maradona, at a time when flair players did not get anywhere even remotely like the type of protection they get today. You had to almost axe someone to death before you got a red card in the 60's/70's!
Look at Pele's treatment in the 66 WC. Please do some research Ismail before you come out with crap like that. The organisation is better tactically now of course, but you didn't need as much in those days when you can kick someone 5 feet in the air to stop players, and you did so with relatively little risk of even receiving a yellow!
I was talking about Pele nor Maradona. My knowledge is limited (I admit it), but I have seen many videos of Garrincha (by many people the best dribbler of all time, and by most Brazilians held in the same level as Pele). He was magical yes, but on the other side it looked to me that players protected him, and they didn't went to him that hard. In many times, he was with the ball, and defenders only looked at him, they didn't even try to get the ball. In today's Premier League and Serie A, I am sure that most of the defenders wouldn't do that. They would went hard on him and if they could not get the ball, they would break him.
Pele and Garrincha were on the same era. I know that there were some dirty games at the time (I think that a game between 2 south america nations is considered the dirtiest game in football), but most of the games were not as dirty as today. Also, most of the footballers didn't have these much injuries although the medicine wasn't even near today's level.
Maradona on the other hand is something else. It was on the time when the defense was probably the strongest of all time.
He isn't talking down those players.
He is mocking those that suggest that Napoli was pub team that only was good because of Maradona and those that suggest that there is no difference between how athletic the game has become now compared to the 60s.
For their generations Pele and Maradona were the greatest to play the game, would they have been born at the time of Messi and Ronaldo they might still be the greatest but like many have pointed out comparing them is all based on pure speculation on both ends because the circumstance keep changing all the time.
Not to mention that it is hard to compare players anyways since all of them have strength and weaknesses and were better in some parts and weaker in other parts compared to the other great players.
It's already the same with Messi and Ronaldo imo. they are both outstanding players and it's hard to say who is really the better player and who is more important of their team let alone that the goals both of them score make a lot of people forget that there are other important factors to football that get often overlooked but in the end are just as important to winning games.