Casemiro/Kroos/Modric or Busquets/Xavi/Iniesta?

Based Adnan

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2014
Messages
4,434
With the former seemingly coming to an end which of these two great midfields was better in your eyes?
 
Modric, Kroos and Casemiro for me. They could play and dominate in any era, with any style of play and as a result have won more on the biggest stage.
 
both incredible but the Barca midfield is the best three man midfield I've seen

the Madrid one is the second best though

maybe they are 1 and 2 of all time?
 
Tarrou said:
both incredible but the Barca midfield is the best three man midfield I've seen

the Madrid one is the second best though

maybe they are 1 and 2 of all time?
Click to expand...
In terms of three man midfield they are definitely among 1 and 2 all time, especially when 3 man midfield system is more of modern football thing.
 
AussieDevil said:
Modric, Kroos and Casemiro for me. They could play and dominate in any era, with any style of play and as a result have won more on the biggest stage.
Click to expand...
They rarely ever dominated against other big teams if we're being honest, atleast nothing like the way Xavi/Busquets/Iniesta did. That Barca midfield completely dominated every midfield they faced with no exception.
 
Definitely the latter; that Barca trio was the best of all time, bar none, I dare say.
 
The Barca 3 hit peaks that the Real 3 simply never did.
Both great though
 
footballistic orgasm said:
They rarely ever dominated against other big teams if we're being honest, atleast nothing like the way Xavi/Busquets/Iniesta did. That Barca midfield completely dominated every midfield they faced with no exception.
Click to expand...
Correct. Madrid were also consistently second best in the league till La Liga went through the recent lull. In terms of actual midfield work like control and domination, the Barcelona midfield were much better. Madrid had better squad depth / options (not just midfield) which helps in cup competitions and one off games.
 
They made a player that scores 6 goals a season in the french league the greatest player of all time so the latter
 
Honestly, I think Madrid are a little overrated with their recent run. Sure, they were a great team, but I don't remember considering them the best team for even a single year of their CL's. They always managed to squeak by somehow, but they never really convinced me as a team that could boss other teams like that Barca midfield could. They didn't even win their domestic league for most of those CL's which would say a lot about them as far as "best team goes". So this is no competition. That 2008-2012 Barca side was almost unstoppable. They made other teams look like children and this goes to show how much of the CL is about luck as they should easily have won more.
 
Overall and not just for one prime season: Kroos Modric Casemiro. More adaptable. More clutch. Much less dependent on one particular system. More complete as a trio in terms of qualities.

Xavi Iniesta Busquets wouldn't work in any style of play other than that very specific system Barca and Spain played. They are the best example of system players and their career graph pretty much confirms that. People seem to idealise that style of play(I absolutely do not) so majority will find the Barca trio more aesthetic and pleasing to the eye. I also find Busquets to be massively overrated. He's pretty much been a liability off the ball for years.

The Barca trio also had the privilege of playing for the same national team unlike the Madrid trio.
 
Casemiro / de jong / Eriksen (bruno) where it's at baby.

Jokes aside while I prefer the character and mastery of the Madrid trio i don't think they ever dominated the game like their Spanish peers did them dominating the international scene also adds to their legacy.

Longevity should be Madrid while peak should be them Spanish fellows.

3 all time great combination that will go down in history we were lucky to have seen them both play.
 
AussieDevil said:
Modric, Kroos and Casemiro for me. They could play and dominate in any era, with any style of play and as a result have won more on the biggest stage.
Click to expand...
Barcelona kept winning league titles though at Madrid’s peak. Their midfield even well past their best outshone Madrid’s easily even in Xavi and Iniesta’s latter years.


TenonTen said:
Overall and not just for one prime season: Kroos Modric Casemiro. More adaptable. More clutch. Much less dependent on one particular system. More complete as a trio in terms of qualities.

Xavi Iniesta Busquets wouldn't work in any style of play other than that very specific system Barca and Spain played. They are the best example of system players and their career graph pretty much confirms that. People seem to idealise that style of play(I absolutely do not) so majority will find the Barca trio more aesthetic and pleasing to the eye. I also find Busquets to be massively overrated. He's pretty much been a liability off the ball for years.

The Barca trio also had the privilege of playing for the same national team unlike the Madrid trio.
Click to expand...
It was far more frightening facing the Barcelona trio than Real Madrid. Madrid have always seemed beatable as Barca at their peak you knew it was a hiding basically and you just had to take it.

Kroos is perhaps my fav player to watch out of all those mentioned though due to his freakish long range passes from deep.

Against cannon fodder I’d take Kroos against world class sides Xavi was the guy as his close control was a LOT better under pressure. Iniesta again over Modric but they are very similar.

Buquettes above Casemiro every day and twice on a Sunday. An ageing Busquettes dominated Italy’s midfield in the Euros almost by himself.

I’m still scratching my head how Spain didn’t win the last big tournament apart from having Morata up front to miss easy goals.
 
Given Spain and Barcelona won everything with Busquets Xavi and Iniesta midfield. It is an easy pick. The quality is not even close to be honest.
 
Easily the latter for me, they were just something else.

You just lose hope watching them play, you doing get the same feeling of hopelessness with the RM midfield
 
I wonder how dominant KCM could have been under Guardiola. He manages to have all of his teams to be extremely dominant. Just curious if KCM would reach even greater heights with his setup.
 
TenonTen said:
Overall and not just for one prime season: Kroos Modric Casemiro. More adaptable. More clutch. Much less dependent on one particular system. More complete as a trio in terms of qualities.

Xavi Iniesta Busquets wouldn't work in any style of play other than that very specific system Barca and Spain played. They are the best example of system players and their career graph pretty much confirms that. People seem to idealise that style of play(I absolutely do not) so majority will find the Barca trio more aesthetic and pleasing to the eye. I also find Busquets to be massively overrated. He's pretty much been a liability off the ball for years.

The Barca trio also had the privilege of playing for the same national team unlike the Madrid trio.
Click to expand...
That midfield three is the system. It’s an argument that can be used for a single player but it can’t be used for a midfield unit that literally was that system that they supposedly need to dominate.
 
That Madrid trio is (was?) brilliant and they certainly are one of the all-time great midfields but there’s a clear gap between the two. Madrid often won against the flow of the game — they did it consistently enough to rule the luck out but it was still so reliant on individual pieces of magic from Cristiano, Bale, Di Maria, Marcelo, Ramos, Navas, Courtois… for Barça it was always about that midfield & Messi, they suffocated their opponents, not leaving them even a glance of opportunity. And the same was true for the all-conquering Spain but it was even more visible without Messi — what a tremendously boring yet efficient side that left no place for competition. Death by a thousand passes.

I’d liken Madrid trio to Zidane, Vieira, Deschamps/Makélélé or maybe the Juve midfield with Zidane, Deschamps & Davids.
 
ThierryHenry14 said:
Given Spain and Barcelona won everything with Busquets Xavi and Iniesta midfield. It is an easy pick. The quality is not even close to be honest.
Click to expand...
This. I also don’t understand the “they could play any system comments”. That Barca trio were the bloody system. So put those 3 in any side and in any league, and they dominate, like we saw with Spain.
 
I think Xavi-Iniesta-Busquets were better, though people overrate them. You'd think they never lost a game, the way people talk about them.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
They rarely ever dominated against other big teams if we're being honest, atleast nothing like the way Xavi/Busquets/Iniesta did. That Barca midfield completely dominated every midfield they faced with no exception.
Click to expand...
I do think we’re a bit biased because they beat us in two finals. They are very different midfields but I’d go RM - they are the most adaptable 3 I’ve ever seen and untouchable for their CL exploits. The Barca 3 played one very specific style incredibly well but their peak was very short when you think about it. They also did have huge amounts of fortune in Europe (both CL wins had massive controversies vs Chelsea and Arsenal).

It’s like when you talk about who is the GOAT, consistency and longevity really is the differentiator - hence why you don’t really hear people say Ronaldo Nazario is the GOAT even if most agree he’s easily the best striker they’ve ever seen.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I think Xavi-Iniesta-Busquets were better, though people overrate them. You'd think they never lost a game, the way people talk about them.
Click to expand...

They didn’t lose too many from 2009 to 2012 for club and country though to be fair. And a high proportion of the games they lost were complete smash and grabs by the other team after being dominated as usual in midfield. They made everyone submit to them and play a different style, how many teams took them on at their own game in that era? Arsenal with Wilshere is one of the few but even then Arsenal won the battle and not the war. Mourinho found a way to beat them a few times by shithousing them but wasn’t taking them on in a toe to toe style way.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I think Xavi-Iniesta-Busquets were better, though people overrate them. You'd think they never lost a game, the way people talk about them.
Click to expand...
It's the only midfield I've seen other top sides yield and concede the midfield battle to from the outset of a game. The tactic either being shell up and try to hit on the break by bypassing the midfield entirely, or just trying to physically wreck them with little intention of playing them conventionally.

That doesn't make them the best of all-time in and of itself, but it's an extreme oddity to see so many great clubs/managers/players not even try and face them in their own, highly regarded manner. It took for them to decline for others to fancy their chances at that.
 
When teams play that Madrid team they feel they at least had a chance in the middle of the pitch.

Not so with the Barca trio. Was it a system thing? I don’t know. If you are making everyone you play look silly does it really matter?
 
The Barca midfield and tbh it's not as close as Madrid's success implies it should be.
 
While at their peak the Barca midfield could dominate everyone, but once they weren't anymore able to pull of their highest level they almost immediately stopped winning big games and Barca was sometimes really played off the park.

Real's midfield appears to be much more adaptable and resilient. They were winning CLs for fun despite others being better in possession, or more dynamic, or more physical or whatever.

So at their peak I rate the Barca midfield higher, but it is related to a short term were only Barca played absolutely dominant possession football and the whole team was built for it. After a few years they were however beaten and sometimes even outclassed at their outstanding qualities.

This was never a big problem for Kroos/Casemiro/Modric who almost always found ways to be effective in all circumstances.

So if the question is "what happens if a midfield trio is dropped in any team" I think in most cases Real's midfield would result in a far better team. At their peak they would improve any team in the world, while the Barca midfield could be a mismatch for most.
 
Tchouameni is better that Casimero. That's why he's leaving.
 
KeanoMagicHat said:
They didn’t lose too many from 2009 to 2012 for club and country though to be fair. And a high proportion of the games they lost were complete smash and grabs by the other team after being dominated as usual in midfield. They made everyone submit to them and play a different style, how many teams took them on at their own game in that era?
Click to expand...

Maybe it has been forgotten over time, but Barcelona's CL record under Guardiola was far from perfect. In the knockout rounds 08/09, they drew 4 games and won 4 (including the final). One of those draws was meaningless (a 1-1 after a 4-0 rout), but the rest weren't. In the knockout rounds 09/10, they won 3 games and drew/lost 3 games in the knockouts. Two away draws and then a rough 3-1 defeat to Inter. Their best campaign was 10/11, in which their only real bad result was a 2-1 defeat to Arsenal. Then in 11/12 they only won 1 of their last 4 games. One year later they ate a cumulative 7-0 defeat to Bayern in the semifinals.

They weren't steamrolling everyone until a freak result kicked them out; they had poor outcomes fairly often. I think the style makes them seem more dominant, because it would look hopeless to go against them. Until you scored and won the game, that is.

Also, Mourinho's ridiculous, over-the-top tactics and his self-mythologizing fed into the notion that the only way to defeat Barcelona was through some insane 7-man defense and smash-n-grab. His results against them were generally poor.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.