Great strikers historical rankings

[Righteous Steps]

The same people that put Gerd Müller in Tier 1 and say he's the GOAT because of "look at his goal records" are putting Lewandowski, Benzema and Suarez one or two tiers below van Basten and Ronaldo because "statistics aren't everything, look at how Ronaldo could dribble for 2 or 3 years", it doesn't make any sense

Whos these same people?

You have to have a completely different outlook on football to have Lewandowski above or even on the same level as Ronaldo.

 

[BayernFan87]

Whos these same people?

You have to have a completely different outlook on football to have Lewandowski above or even on the same level as Ronaldo.

Multiple people on the first page, look at their lists.

And yes, I have Lewandowski, Suarez and Benzema all over Ronaldo. Because while the latter was obviously the technically more gifted and spectacular player, his peak only lasted for only 2 or 3 years and when you look at the whole career the number of goals isn't even close. Saying Ronaldo was the better striker than Lewy/Suarez/Benzema because he was a better dribbler is like saying Ederson is the best goalkeeper ever because he's good with his feet oder Alaba is the best CB ever because his long balls are good. Of course every position has its players that are somewhat more limited and others that are more complete. But shouldn't we look at the "main stats" first of all? Like goals/scorers for attacking players, tacklings for defenders, etc.?

Edit: And I don't know why Ronaldos injuries are always brought up. Many great players could probably have an even greater careers without injuries. But on the other hand there's also many players that declined without big injuries. Some of you argue that without injuries it would've been guaranteed that Ronaldo would have played like in his peak for another 10 years. You simply don't know.
Just look at Adriano or Kaka for two other examples of once "best player in the world" material. I don't think anyone is putting Kaka in Tier 1 of a "best attacking midfielder ever" list, just because his short peak was great and he was a joy to watch.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Multiple people on the first page, look at their lists.

And yes, I have Lewandowski, Suarez and Benzema all over Ronaldo. Because while the latter was obviously the technically more gifted and spectacular player, his peak only lasted for only 2 or 3 years and when you look at the whole career the number of goals isn't even close. Saying Ronaldo was the better striker than Lewy/Suarez/Benzema because he was a better dribbler is like saying Ederson is the best goalkeeper ever because he's good with his feet oder Alaba is the best CB ever because his long balls are good. Of course every position has its players that are somewhat more limited and others that are more complete. But shouldn't we look at the "main stats" first of all? Like goals/scorers for attacking players, tacklings for defenders, etc.?

Edit: And I don't know why Ronaldos injuries are always brought up. Many great players could probably have an even greater careers without injuries. But on the other hand there's also many players that declined without big injuries. Some of you argue that without injuries it would've been guaranteed that Ronaldo would have played like in his peak for another 10 years. You simply don't know.
Just look at Adriano or Kaka for two other examples of once "best player in the world" material. I don't think anyone is putting Kaka in Tier 1 of a "best attacking midfielder ever" list, just because his short peak was great and he was a joy to watch.

There’s no point in even entertaining this argument, but would just add even outside of his peak Ronaldo still scored 8 goals h the most in 02 World Cup and won b’allon dor subsequently and in 03/04 still scored 31 goals in all competitions, approximately 10 years after he had broke onto the scene with 35 goals in 36 games for PSV as an 18 years old, Ronaldos peak gets talked about because he was on a whole different level to what people had seen before at least not since Maradona, he was scoring 1 goal per game game(give or take) at 18 and unlike Lewandowski even at his peak literally was creating hoards of chances for himself by way of his genius.

That doesn’t mean though he didn’t have great years for the rest of his career, the thing he was a phenom an alien that was bought down to the real world via injuries but was still top 3 players in the world after this point for many a season, you can’t compare neither Suarez Lewandoskwi or Benzema to him, they would tell you that themselves.

 

[abundance]

Peak was way too short.

Yep Adriano can't enter this discussion, he didn't even have a proper peak, poor sod gave up even trying to pretend he cared about football before that.

If not for his clinical depression and descent into alcoholism, he would've been T2 at the very least... He was an animal, he had it all and he was built like a rock.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Technically speaking L. Ronaldo is Ronaldo?

Yes but there will be confusion, and given the fact that his namesake is all time top goalscorer (this thread is about great striker historical ranking afterall), who also gets most headlines throughout last decade. Most would just refer him as L.Ronaldo or Ronaldo9 or Fat Ronaldo, or Fenomeno etc.

 

[BayernFan87]

That doesn’t mean though he didn’t have great years for the rest of his career, the thing he was a phenom an alien that was bought down to the real world via injuries but was still top 3 players in the world after this point for many a season, you can’t compare neither Suarez Lewandoskwi or Benzema to him, they would tell you that themselves.

Of course they would, that's like asking Tyson or Klitschko if they would compare themselves to Ali

But yeah I don't think we can find a common ground here.
Don't get me wrong, Ronaldo used to be one my favorite players in my early teen years. But all in all he's not even in the top 50 of the best champions league scorers ever and that is why I could never put him at the top of a "best striker ever" list.

I'm just curious: Would you put Ronaldinho ahead of Zidane or Iniesta in a "best midfielder ever" debate?

 

[ReSchmycling]

Yeah, but that's the most important part for a striker, isn't it?

For you the best striker is obviously the one with the best dribbling and the best technique. For me it's the one with the most goals and scorers across the whole career.
As I said: Ronaldo definitely had a more impressive peak. But even then he wasn't a goal scoring machine like quite some other players.

It's not like the stats are close: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UEFA_Champions_League_top_scorers
Brazilian Ronaldo doesn't even make the top 50 with 14 goals in 40 appearances.

Ronaldo barely played in the Champions League during his peak years, when the other European competitions were far more prestigious than now because of fewer CL entrants from the bigger countries. He had very strong goal-scoring numbers in the UEFA Cup for both PSV seasons and in the Cup Winners' Cup for his Barcelona season, before tailing off a little for Inter in 1997-98 (UEFA Cup) and more so 98-99 (CL), when he had injury problems and half of his matches were against Real Madrid and the United treble-winning team.

And for the other players you named, surely the sustained dominance and overall quality of their teams has to be taken into consideration when interpreting their goal totals, as well as the other differences in goal numbers between eras? Benzema (0.59) and Suárez's (0.38) Champions League goals per game figures aren't right at the top of that list either (Suárez's barely above Ronaldo's 0.35), although of course both had more of a supporting role for significant periods.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Of course they would, that's like asking Tyson or Klitschko if they would compare themselves to Ali

But yeah I don't think we can find a common ground here.
Don't get me wrong, Ronaldo used to be one my favorite players in my early teen years. But all in all he's not even in the top 50 of the best champions league scorers ever and that is why I could never put him at the top of a "best striker ever" list.

I'm just curious: Would you put Ronaldinho ahead of Zidane or Iniesta in a "best midfielder ever" debate?

This is the problem, there’s good reasons for this, that’s a lazy way to judge things, there’s a post on here or maybe Twitter that goes into detail of why Ronaldo barely played in the CL, I’ll see if I can find it.
Edit

To answer the next question Ronaldinho Iniesta and Zidane would be in the same tier for me, Ronaldinho should probably be higher but then again in terms of football, Iniesta and Zidane are both greater than Suarez Lewandowski and Benzema also, also would say Ronaldo actually has more years as a top footballer than Ronaldinho did also, like I said Ronaldo had a 10 year period where he was a top player in European leagues from 93-2004.

Out of all those names Ronaldo is the only one who showed even a season where he looked like he could genuinely be the greatest player we had ever seen, this is not the same for Zidane Iniesta Suarez etc.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Among those I've seen:

Tier 1 - Suarez and Henry
Tier 2 - RVN, Lewandowski, Eto'o, Benzema
Tier 3 - Aguero, Drogba

Feel I'm missing some. Ibra doesn't make it, he's extremely overrated. Not included Rooney as he was a bit of everything.

 

[Boavista]

Not that I'd argue for his inclusion among the greatest strikers obviously, because (rightfully so) he was never regarded among the very best of his generation, but I wonder if Klose had played in a different era, say 70s, whether his achievements would be more romanticised now?

 

[Red the Bear]

People are putting too much emphasis on European cup numbers , while always a prestigious competition it wasn't given the priority it's afforded to now .
Also a ton of it is based on the how dominant or European savvy your team is .
For context real would only have one of their four cups if the qualifications system was the same as the 90s for the past decade (only league winners qualifying real only did so for their 2017/18 campaign).

 

[WeePat]

This is the problem, there’s good reasons for this, that’s a lazy way to judge things, there’s a post on here or maybe Twitter that goes into detail of why Ronaldo barely played in the CL, I’ll see if I can find it.
Edit

To answer the next question Ronaldinho Iniesta and Zidane would be in the same tier for me, Ronaldinho should probably be higher but then again in terms of football, Iniesta and Zidane are both greater than Suarez Lewandowski and Benzema also, also would say Ronaldo actually has more years as a top footballer than Ronaldinho did also, like I said Ronaldo had a 10 year period where he was a top player in European leagues from 93-2004.

Out of all those names Ronaldo is the only one who showed even a season where he looked like he could genuinely be the greatest player we had ever seen, this is not the same for Zidane Iniesta Suarez etc.

Thanks for the thread. Rejigged my memory on some things just before and after year 2000 and learned some other things. Yeah his CL record can't be held against him in a discussion like this.

This bit about CR7 stood out to me for comparison. I hadn't ever considered this before. His legacy would look really different if the same qualification rules applied to him and many other modern day CL greats.

 

[Andrade]

Multiple people on the first page, look at their lists.

And yes, I have Lewandowski, Suarez and Benzema all over Ronaldo. Because while the latter was obviously the technically more gifted and spectacular player, his peak only lasted for only 2 or 3 years and when you look at the whole career the number of goals isn't even close. Saying Ronaldo was the better striker than Lewy/Suarez/Benzema because he was a better dribbler is like saying Ederson is the best goalkeeper ever because he's good with his feet oder Alaba is the best CB ever because his long balls are good. Of course every position has its players that are somewhat more limited and others that are more complete. But shouldn't we look at the "main stats" first of all? Like goals/scorers for attacking players, tacklings for defenders, etc.?

Edit: And I don't know why Ronaldos injuries are always brought up. Many great players could probably have an even greater careers without injuries. But on the other hand there's also many players that declined without big injuries. Some of you argue that without injuries it would've been guaranteed that Ronaldo would have played like in his peak for another 10 years. You simply don't know.
Just look at Adriano or Kaka for two other examples of once "best player in the world" material. I don't think anyone is putting Kaka in Tier 1 of a "best attacking midfielder ever" list, just because his short peak was great and he was a joy to watch.

With all due respect, you are not acknowledging that Ronaldo had scored 200 goals by the time he was 21 years old. He was on a similar trajectory to Pele. It's not just that he could 'dribble' (although the fact that he had twice the skill of Lewa/Suarez/Benz) is relevant.

While those guys were struggling to find their feet in their early years, Ronaldo was taking over the world. The word 'phenomenon' was used for a reason: we'd never seen anything like it post Pele. Maradona was the only comparable and perhaps greater figure, but he was a completely different type of player.

Ronaldo's speed, his strength, his wizardry, his relentless scoring, it was awe inspiring. The other guys are great great forwards, but we're talking about a totally different level here. You've seem him, you know this.

Re the injuries, his knees practically exploded. In an earlier era his career would have been over. He was out for 2 years prior to his return in the 2002 world cup. That was his greatest success, but as a player, he was tremendously diminished, not the same guy at all. We give him credit for recovering and having some semblance of a career after those terrible injuries. But it's almost like that was a different person playing for Madrid, Milan etc.

If you prize longevity then that's fine, and you're right in saying that we don't know for sure if he would have sustained his early level for 10 years without the injuries. He was a much better player than Kaka and Adriano, so I don't think those are reasonable comparators. But as I said, we can't be sure what would have happened.

What we do know is that some people prize peak over longevity. When a guy was at his absolute best, how good was he? In that framework, the idea of comparing players like Benz/Lewa/Suarez to someone like Ronaldo becomes frankly ridiculous, and that's why some people would easily feel justified in putting Ronaldo above those guys in a list like this.

 

[Sayros]

With all due respect, you are not acknowledging that Ronaldo had scored 200 goals by the time he was 21 years old. He was on a similar trajectory to Pele. It's not just that he could 'dribble' (although the fact that he had twice the skill of Lewa/Suarez/Benz) is relevant.

While those guys were struggling to find their feet in their early years, Ronaldo was taking over the world. The word 'phenomenon' was used for a reason: we'd never seen anything like it post Pele. Maradona was the only comparable and perhaps greater figure, but he was a completely different type of player.

Ronaldo's speed, his strength, his wizardry, his relentless scoring, it was awe inspiring. The other guys are great great forwards, but we're talking about a totally different level here. You've seem him, you know this.

Re the injuries, his knees practically exploded. In an earlier era his career would have been over. He was out for 2 years prior to his return in the 2002 world cup. That was his greatest success, but as a player, he was tremendously diminished, not the same guy at all. We give him credit for recovering and having some semblance of a career after those terrible injuries. But it's almost like that was a different person playing for Madrid, Milan etc.

If you prize longevity then that's fine, and you're right in saying that we don't know for sure if he would have sustained his early level for 10 years without the injuries. He was a much better player than Kaka and Adriano, so I don't think those are reasonable comparators. But as I said, we can't be sure what would have happened.

What we do know is that some people prize peak over longevity. When a guy was at his absolute best, how good was he? In that framework, the idea of comparing players like Benz/Lewa/Suarez to someone like Ronaldo becomes frankly ridiculous, and that's why some people would easily feel justified in putting Ronaldo above those guys in a list like this.

It's another facet to these multi-generational comparisons, peak or career? It's why I get in such debates over Ronaldinho, who I think is massively overrated for a very short peak. R9 in comparison, still managed to be one of the best strikers in the world during his playing career even past his similarly short peak. I think exceptional peak like those two had should count for something, but the returns should be diminishing if their peers are putting up consistent performances over a decade that might not match their peak, but is in the neighborhood of their level. That's why I die on such hills as Neymar or Henry are above Ronaldinho, who some people somehow put as a top 10 GOAT which is absolutely bonkers to me.

Peak matters, but only up to a certain point when it's so short-lived and we're comparing them to people who have done it consistently over a decade. But that's just some opinions, others see it as what was the best level we've seen at any given moment to compare what players are actually capable of and put that in a bottle as an overall comparison.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Thanks for the thread. Rejigged my memory on some things just before and after year 2000 and learned some other things. Yeah his CL record can't be held against him in a discussion like this.

This bit about CR7 stood out to me for comparison. I hadn't ever considered this before. His legacy would look really different if the same qualification rules applied to him and many other modern day CL greats.

No problem mate came across it by chance, things like this are important especially for younger fans who think certain things now have always been that way, there’s a nuance you have to apply when comparing across generations which is partly why it’s such a thankless task in itself.

 

[Red the Bear]

No problem mate came across it by chance, things like this are important especially for younger fans who think certain things now have always been that way, there’s a nuance you have to apply when comparing across generations which is partly why it’s such a thankless task in itself.

I think in case of Ronaldo a minute per goal comparison would be even more impressive as he rarely played the full length due to his injuries.

 

[Cascarino]

Tier 1 - John Charles

Tier 2 - Hal Robson-Kanu (2016 Euros)

 

[Lay]

Tier 1 - John Charles

Tier 2 - Hal Robson-Kanu (2016 Euros)

John Charles has an incredible goal record at Leeds and Juventus. Never seen him play but I know he's adored by Juventus and was voted their best foreign player ever.

 

[Red the Bear]

Tier 1 - John Charles

Tier 2 - Hal Robson-Kanu (2016 Euros)

Great shout out , Charles has Great numbers for juventus and generally the English man who left and played for a foreign league in that era intrigue me.

 

[Hammondo]

RvN.

Out and out striker, none like him exist now.

Probably for good reasons.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Cristiano Ronaldo has been a striker for at least 5 or 6 years, I don’t know how poacher-y he has to get to be considered a striker. And in which case he’s in the top tier. He’s the highest scorer ever, do you think he got those goals from midfield? He’s a striker.

 

[Red the Bear]

Cristiano Ronaldo has been a striker for at least 5 or 6 years, I don’t know how poacher-y he has to get to be considered a striker. And in which case he’s in the top tier. He’s the highest scorer ever, do you think he got those goals from midfield? He’s a striker.

By that logic mess is also a striker.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

George Weah hasn’t been mentioned at all. Which is a shame. He was a joy to watch for a decent time. He was like Ronaldo with the volume turned down a notch.

 

[SportingCP96]

Mário Jardel, one of the best strikers ever, he won golden boot twice

He has to be on this list. Insane numbers.

 

[Red the Bear]

He has to be on this list. Insane numbers.

His record outside Portugal is questionable.

 

[Red the Bear]

George Weah hasn’t been mentioned at all. Which is a shame. He was a joy to watch for a decent time. He was like Ronaldo with the volume turned down a notch.

I have a hard time ranking him due to his short peak but indeed he was very beautiful to watch.

 

[Andrade]

It's another facet to these multi-generational comparisons, peak or career? It's why I get in such debates over Ronaldinho, who I think is massively overrated for a very short peak. R9 in comparison, still managed to be one of the best strikers in the world during his playing career even past his similarly short peak. I think exceptional peak like those two had should count for something, but the returns should be diminishing if their peers are putting up consistent performances over a decade that might not match their peak, but is in the neighborhood of their level. That's why I die on such hills as Neymar or Henry are above Ronaldinho, who some people somehow put as a top 10 GOAT which is absolutely bonkers to me.

It's difficult to judge. I personally tend to lean towards the peak argument but I can understand the opposite view. For example, I wouldn't personally have Neymar or Henry above Ronaldinho. All three are awesome but Dinho is the only one who flirted with GOATness in his peak performances IMO. Obviously the ideal is incredible peak and extremely high level of consistency, but you're talking about 4 or 5 people in the entire history of the sport that might meet that standard.

Peak matters, but only up to a certain point when it's so short-lived and we're comparing them to people who have done it consistently over a decade. But that's just some opinions, others see it as what was the best level we've seen at any given moment to compare what players are actually capable of and put that in a bottle as an overall comparison.

I think the problem is that careers, once they are finished and recede into the distance, tend to get reduced to a handful of main achievements or talking points. So even if you are really consistent, only the highlights will get focused on eventually anyway.

 

[Sayros]

It's difficult to judge. I personally tend to lean towards the peak argument but I can understand the opposite view. For example, I wouldn't personally have Neymar or Henry above Ronaldinho. All three are awesome but Dinho is the only one who flirted with GOATness in his peak performances IMO. Obviously the ideal is incredible peak and extremely high level of consistency, but you're talking about 4 or 5 people in the entire history of the sport that might meet that standard.



I think the problem is that careers, once they are finished and recede into the distance, tend to get reduced to a handful of main achievements or talking points. So even if you are really consistent, only the highlights will get focused on eventually anyway.

I'm not expecting peak levels for a decade, but that the fall from the peak isn't as dramatic as it's been with Ronaldinho.

On your last point, you're right, and we also tend to erase the poor moments or all context so previous legends are always an unfair comparison to current players where we see them, flaws and highlights.

 

[Pablo18th]

Among those I've seen:

Tier 1 - Suarez and Henry
Tier 2 - RVN, Lewandowski, Eto'o, Benzema
Tier 3 - Aguero, Drogba

Feel I'm missing some. Ibra doesn't make it, he's extremely overrated. Not included Rooney as he was a bit of everything.

I like your tiers but I wonder, where would you put Shevchenko, David Villa, Fernando Torres and Klose?

 

[j65454]

I think if someone includes the likes of Shearer in there, you certainly can't exclude the likes of Gary Lineker. Both absolutely different types of players, but those two were at very least on a par if not better than RVP in my opinion who I see mentioned in posts. Lineker a Golden Boot winner and one of the few English players to do well abroad.

It also depends on longevity. For a time prime Michael Owen was an absolute monster as was Fernando Torres. They both faded quickly, but at there absolute peak they were both eye opening.

Also, what about Ian Rush, who was the dominant striker in the English divisions for a long while?

 

[::sonny::]

Great times

 

[BayernFan87]

With all due respect, you are not acknowledging that Ronaldo had scored 200 goals by the time he was 21 years old. He was on a similar trajectory to Pele. It's not just that he could 'dribble' (although the fact that he had twice the skill of Lewa/Suarez/Benz) is relevant.

While those guys were struggling to find their feet in their early years, Ronaldo was taking over the world. The word 'phenomenon' was used for a reason: we'd never seen anything like it post Pele. Maradona was the only comparable and perhaps greater figure, but he was a completely different type of player.

Ronaldo's speed, his strength, his wizardry, his relentless scoring, it was awe inspiring. The other guys are great great forwards, but we're talking about a totally different level here. You've seem him, you know this.

Re the injuries, his knees practically exploded. In an earlier era his career would have been over. He was out for 2 years prior to his return in the 2002 world cup. That was his greatest success, but as a player, he was tremendously diminished, not the same guy at all. We give him credit for recovering and having some semblance of a career after those terrible injuries. But it's almost like that was a different person playing for Madrid, Milan etc.

If you prize longevity then that's fine, and you're right in saying that we don't know for sure if he would have sustained his early level for 10 years without the injuries. He was a much better player than Kaka and Adriano, so I don't think those are reasonable comparators. But as I said, we can't be sure what would have happened.

What we do know is that some people prize peak over longevity. When a guy was at his absolute best, how good was he? In that framework, the idea of comparing players like Benz/Lewa/Suarez to someone like Ronaldo becomes frankly ridiculous, and that's why some people would easily feel justified in putting Ronaldo above those guys in a list like this.

Fair enough, I think we can leave it at some people rather judging peak and pure skill, other people rather looking at the whole career and statistics

 

[Pretzels81]

Tier1 has to be DiStefano, Pele, Eusebio, Müller, Van Basten, Romário, Ronaldo, CR, Messi.

Those guys are on a higher level than the likes of Bergkamp, Cantona, Sheva, Henry, Ibra, Suárez, Lewa, etc.

 

[Thelongsleevesofblomqvist]

Ronaldo, Van Basten, Müller, Puskás, Romarió, Eusebió, C. Ronaldo

Lewandowski, Seeler, Henry, H. Sanchez, Ibrahimovic, Suarez

Eto´o, Batistuta, Nordahl, Shevchenko, Benzema, Fontaine, Weah, Klinsmann, Koksic, Papin, Piola, Kane

Greaves, Riva, Agüero, Rush, Van Nistelrooy, Crespo, Rossi, Kluivert, Lineker, Shearer, Drogba, Owen, Tostao, Villa, Bican, Vieri, Kempes

 

[TenonTen]

Ronaldo, Van Basten, Müller, Puskás, Romarió, Eusebió, (C.Ronaldo)

Lewandowski, Seeler, Henry, H. Sanchez, Ibrahimovic, Suarez

Etoó, Batistuta, Nordahl, Benzema, Shevchenko, Fontaine, Weah, Klinsmann, Koksic, Papin, Piola, Kane

Greaves, Riva, Agüero, Rush, Van Nistelrooy, Crespo, Rossi, Kluivert, Lineker, Shearer, Drogba, Owen, Tostao, Villa, Bican, Vieri, Kempes

Ibra higher than Benz??


What's the general consensus on Ibra vs Benz? Both great strikers but curious to know.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

I have a hard time ranking him due to his short peak but indeed he was very beautiful to watch.

Same. He was a top player. Some truly racist connotations to his Balon D’Or award being a product of being African but he had a 24 month period of unexpected brilliance I felt him worth a mention.

 

[Red the Bear]

Same. He was a top player. Some truly racist connotations to his Balon D’Or award being a product of being African but he had a 24 month period of unexpected brilliance I felt him worth a mention.

In context of that year he deserved it , but I guess it robbed a lot of South Americans the wrong way not having the first eligible balon d'or given to them.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

In context of that year he deserved it , but I guess it robbed a lot of South Americans the wrong way not having the first eligible balon d'or given to them.

Fair shout.

 

[BalanceUnAutreJoint]

Tier1 has to be DiStefano, Pele, Eusebio, Müller, Van Basten, Romário, Ronaldo, CR, Messi.

Those guys are on a higher level than the likes of Bergkamp, Cantona, Sheva, Henry, Ibra, Suárez, Lewa, etc.

Van Basten and Romario absolutely do not belong in the same tier as CR/Messi
They're much closer to the level of the players you've put in your tier below such as Suarez,Lewandowski or Henry than they are to Messi/Ronaldo

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Van Basten and Romario absolutely do not belong in the same tier as CR/Messi
They're much closer to the level of the players you've put in your tier below such as Suarez,Lewandowski or Henry than they are to Messi/Ronaldo

You’re wrong. I’d argue that Van Basten and Romario could have slotted into many more teams and succeeded than Messi and Ronaldo. They’re not overall better players, few are. But they were better single chance and single game strikers.

Don’t make it binary.