Is Mbappe the best french player ever?

[bosnian_red]

I get that but these are excuses. During his last years with Juventus he was outplayed by Nedved and Lazio didn't have a team that was particularly better, Bordeaux had a very good team and of course Real Madrid did too. Keep in mind that I totally accept the diea that I may be slighly unfair but if we put Zidane in that undisputable category then we have to explain why more often than not he wasn't the best performer in the league he was playing.

In my opinion Zidane was great and overrated at the same time because people easily overlook the fact that he wasn't the undisputed best during his time. He wasn't clearly better than Figo and he wasn't clearly better than Nedved.

I'd agree with this. To be one of the greatest of all time I don't think you need to be the undisputed best at a certain moment, but you have to have big achievements and show your best level in the biggest moments, along with being definitely one of the best players around.

Take De bruyne for example. He's been a far better league footballer than Zidane. But in the biggest moments? He just hasn't stepped it up, one reason or another. He's one of the greatest premier league footballers, but he won't be mentioned on a level with someone like Zidane.

The midfielders in the past 30 years who can be mentioned and compared with Zidane, for me, based on the mix of agility and impact in big games and success, are guys like Iniesta, Xavi, and probably Matthaus, though that's over 30 years since he was his best. Ronaldinho if you consider him as a midfielder, though he didn't step up in the biggest moments like Zidane did (but was the undisputed best for 2 years).

And besides, the competition for Zidane is Platini who was before my time and didn't do as much national team wise as Zidane did, though as a club career surpassed Zidane (looking at purely honours lists). Aside from Platini and Zidane, who can actually have a say as one of the greatest french players? I think Mbappe will top the list by the time the next world cup is done.

 

[JPRouve]

I'd agree with this. To be one of the greatest of all time I don't think you need to be the undisputed best at a certain moment, but you have to have big achievements and show your best level in the biggest moments, along with being definitely one of the best players around.

Take De bruyne for example. He's been a far better league footballer than Zidane. But in the biggest moments? He just hasn't stepped it up, one reason or another. He's one of the greatest premier league footballers, but he won't be mentioned on a level with someone like Zidane.

The midfielders in the past 30 years who can be mentioned and compared with Zidane, for me, based on the mix of agility and impact in big games and success, are guys like Iniesta, Xavi, and probably Matthaus, though that's over 30 years since he was his best. Ronaldinho if you consider him as a midfielder, though he didn't step up in the biggest moments like Zidane did (but was the undisputed best for 2 years).

You are drifting into something that I have an issue with and we are likely to go nowhere. I don't care much about how people perceive or remember a player, I prefer to judge or try to judge what they did on average compared to their peers. Otherwise you end up with extremely biased opinions on players with the flashiest being overrated by design. That's how we end up overlooking players like Zanetti and Totti or people saying outrageous things about Raul.

To me Zidane has two things that see people overrate him, he was an inventive and flashy ball handler and he has extremely memorable big games moments. He was great but not that far from the great players of his time.

 

[Revan]

Yup.

But seriously, Zidane has not actually won much. Personally I penalize him when it comes to comparing him with other all time greats especially since he has played for extremely good teams full of talent.

Agree on this. Same justification for Luis Ronaldo, who won even less (1 league title, no Champions League, 1 World Cup, well technically 2 but in 1 he did not play a single minute).

 

[Pintu]

I get that but these are excuses. During his last years with Juventus he was outplayed by Nedved and Lazio didn't have a team that was particularly better, Bordeaux had a very good team and of course Real Madrid did too. Keep in mind that I totally accept the diea that I may be slighly unfair but if we put Zidane in that undisputable category then we have to explain why more often than not he wasn't the best performer in the league he was playing.

In my opinion Zidane was great and overrated at the same time because people easily overlook the fact that he wasn't the undisputed best during his time. He wasn't clearly better than Figo and he wasn't clearly better than Nedved.

Real Madrid was also obsessed with "galacticos" and ended up with an unbalanced team. I don't think Bordeaux had the means to compete with Marseille and Paris in the first two seasons. Maybe in the later ones they could have beaten Nantes or AJA to the title, but they also had a deep UEFA Cup run that probably cost them energy-wise.

Lazio was a strong side. They had their 99 CWC winner side and they'd just reinforced it with Veron, Simeone... And it came down to a rainy afternoon at Perugia and a game that should never have taken place in such conditions... Zidane played football in a different era compared to ours.

Modern coaches would not tolerate pitches like this:





Still excuses I know, and I agree on your general message that he wasn't a dominant player throughout league seasons.

 

[ericPSG]

He's a midfielder who was the key player everywhere he played, has won all there was to win, dominated both a CL final and a World Cup final. He is undoubtedly one of the greatest footballers of all time. Not everything is measured by goals or assists, and hate to break it to ya, but the big games, big tournaments are absolutely what your football legacy is defined by. A player who racks up the goals against shit teams but never wins the biggest prizes or performs on the big occasions is not a great player and will not be remembered as anything more than a scorer against shit teams. The big games is what defines your legacy as a player.

Exactly
Zlatan is a great player, and helped a lot of team to win their league
But he wasn’t a big game player that carry a team to win a world cup, Euro or Champion’s league

Henry was a great player but, like Zlatan, could never carry a team on his shoulder as the main guy to win at the highest level in the knockout games (1 goal and 0 assist combined in 2000 and 1998 knockout stage)

Mbappe was key in 2018 and was a Kolo Muani miss away from winning the world cup as the absolut top player.
8 goals in 8 knockout world cup games

No one in France would put Henry in the Zidane / Platini tier.
And Mbappe is on this pace. He is even 1 champion’s league and 1 ballon d’or away to be in this discussion.

 

[General_Elegancia]

Henry was by far sexier, I would choose him over Platini any day.

just joking ahaha

 

[JPRouve]

Real Madrid was also obsessed with "galacticos" and ended up with an unbalanced team. I don't think Bordeaux had the means to compete with Marseille and Paris in the first two seasons. Maybe in the later ones they could have beaten Nantes or AJA to the title, but they also had a deep UEFA Cup run that probably cost them energy-wise.

Lazio was a strong side. They had their 99 CWC winner side and they'd just reinforced it with Veron, Simeone... And it came down to a rainy afternoon at Perugia and a game that should never have taken place in such conditions... Zidane played football in a different era compared to ours.

Modern coaches would not tolerate pitches like this:





Still excuses I know, and I agree on your general message that he wasn't a dominant player throughout league seasons.

Bordeaux absolutely had the means, Marseille, PSG and Monaco were all in the same ballpark. Lazio were a strong side but they weren't better than Juventus on paper, so it's fair to look at Nedved versus Zidane and Nedved was the better player in Serie A or at least equivalent to Zidane.

But the point is that there is a trend of finding mitigating factors. That in itself allows the questioning of any undisputed status, if we have to add caveats then his status becomes debatable.

 

[giorno]

I don't think he is the best big game player of all time. It's not arguable. List his "big games" against those of his peers. And in comparison to his peers, his base level was actually mediocre.

Who are his peers? Mediocre is wrong regardless, but humour me please

 

[giorno]

I get that but these are excuses. During his last years with Juventus he was outplayed by Nedved and Lazio didn't have a team that was particularly better, Bordeaux had a very good team and of course Real Madrid did too. Keep in mind that I totally accept the diea that I may be slighly unfair but if we put Zidane in that undisputable category then we have to explain why more often than not he wasn't the best performer in the league he was playing.

In my opinion Zidane was great and overrated at the same time because people easily overlook the fact that he wasn't the undisputed best during his time. He wasn't clearly better than Figo and he wasn't clearly better than Nedved.

Where did this idea that Nedved wad equal or better than Zidane in serie A comes from? He wasn't. He really really wasn't. Zidane was the best player in the league in 4 of his 6 seasons in Italy - 1 of which was because of Ronaldo and juiced up Del Piero. He was also very clearly better than Figo, not by much granted, but still obviously better

The point of Zidane not winning enough is fair though, but he really can't be compared to the likes of Messi, Maradona, Pelé, Di Stefano, etc...

I think Platini was better, sure, Platini was a more dominant force because of his goalscoring

 

[abundance]

Henry was by far sexier, I would choose him over Platini any day.

just joking ahaha

mmm
i dont know
i'd ask a woman first
about who's sexier

 

[AlPistacho]

When ze seagulls………………….. follow ze trawler……………… it is because….. they think… sardines…………… will be thrown……..into the sea.

 

[jesperjaap]

Saying their international careers (with France) were probably as good as Henry's isn't the same as putting them alongside the very best. I think most here are saying Platini (1st) and Zidane(2nd) are the untouchables.

Yes personally have Thuram there still, jsut ahead of Cafu and Zanetti for me as the besty right back I have ever seen. Defenders never seem to be mentioned. The likes of Thuram, Maldini and Baresi are definately amongst the best players of all time for me

 

[troylocker]

He's at least on course to become one of or the best French player ever. He needs to rack up plenty of more great seasons to surpass Platini and Zidane still though.
A move to Spain next summer won't hurt him either.

 

[jem]

That's the issue with Zidane and why I get the overrated claims. His best games are as good as any and are also memorable but they weren't the norm, yet it seems that people extend those exceptional games to the other hundreds of games where he was good or very good but not exceptional.

To be fair, I think a lot of people like myself only saw Zidane play in the big games (I certainly wasn't a regular watcher of Serie A or La Liga back then.) That's why I'm always a bit wary of people claiming so-and-so is the best, given that they've likely only seen a handful of games featuring said player. In my case (and I imagine for many others), I can only really speak with certainty about players who have played/are playing for the team that I support (United in my case.)

 

[Sayros]

Lets agree to disagree because we're a mile apart on this opinion. Hometown kid winning it for little old Paris? please. Maybe if you hadn't have spent billions on wages and transfer fee's and have a front 3 that dwarf your nearest rivals wage budget alone id see the story being told.

Yes, as opposed to Madrid, that financially prudent bunch.

 

[Sayros]

It wasn't a putdown, but don't you think he will genuinely have a better chance of breaking those kinds of records with PSG in Ligue 1, than if he went to the Premier League, for example?

I think he'd break records anywhere he went because football is so top-heavy now that any team that could actually afford Mbappe is probably dwarfing financially 95% of the rest of their league at minimum. Since there's maybe 2 teams at best that can compete within that league, with the rest being basically cannon-fodder (which is not always easy to score against as we've seen with City, but overall still cannon fodder), with enough time he'd break any league's records he spend a significant amount of time in IMO.