Best to leave it here I think
Is Pele overrated?
- Thread starter UnofficialDevil
- Start date
Best to leave it here I think
Anyone who can’t acknowledge Pele was pure magic is an idiot to say it bluntly.
I’d like to see an 18 year old coming on in the WC quarter finals to score the winner and then score twice in the semi finals and finally twice in the final. 18 years old.… wow!
There is a reason he was at one point perhaps the most famous person on earth, it is not because he is now a senile old fart I can tell you that much.
He was an absolute monster in 2 of his 4 world cups, there is a reason nobody has repeated that since, it is because its is fecking hard to replicate.
Read this article, Pele would have won 7 ballon d’ors had he been eligible. Also read my earlier posts about the regional championships who had 4 to 5 class teams, they were not all simple pushover. A regional league with corinthians, sao paolo, santos and palmeiras never is and never will be. The other big regional league had teals like vasco da gama, botafogo, flamengo and fluminense. Name me 2 other leagues with 4 teams of this calibre… there is literally only England and perhaps Argentina. On top of that those 2 states also had an interstate league which pele completely dominated as well.
https://www.sportbible.com/football...e-ballon-dors-than-messi-and-ronaldo-20201228
I’d like to see an 18 year old coming on in the WC quarter finals to score the winner and then score twice in the semi finals and finally twice in the final. 18 years old.… wow!
There is a reason he was at one point perhaps the most famous person on earth, it is not because he is now a senile old fart I can tell you that much.
He was an absolute monster in 2 of his 4 world cups, there is a reason nobody has repeated that since, it is because its is fecking hard to replicate.
Read this article, Pele would have won 7 ballon d’ors had he been eligible. Also read my earlier posts about the regional championships who had 4 to 5 class teams, they were not all simple pushover. A regional league with corinthians, sao paolo, santos and palmeiras never is and never will be. The other big regional league had teals like vasco da gama, botafogo, flamengo and fluminense. Name me 2 other leagues with 4 teams of this calibre… there is literally only England and perhaps Argentina. On top of that those 2 states also had an interstate league which pele completely dominated as well.
https://www.sportbible.com/football...e-ballon-dors-than-messi-and-ronaldo-20201228
Well since you started all these degrading nonsense, there’s always only one end to this. But yeh, let’s just leave it here.
I think the only fair argument against Pelé and players of his era was that the average footballer was worse because the talent pool was less driven by the lack of the money in the game. Back then it was hard to make a living and retirement playing even in the top leagues unless you were a superstar like Pelé or George Best. It probably meant that a lot potential players opted out for another career. Back in the 60's, it's was gamble to make a living even if you were playing in the 1st division in England. These days you have average players making 100 k a week in the PL. I'm pretty sure the financial inflation in the game has almost meant that the talent pool is greater which means that the average player is a greater opponent. Not to mention how common it was for a long time for players to have too much to drink at pubs and smoke. It's no fault of Pelé of course, but the dedication and professionalim of players is completely different.
How is this even a question.
The answer is NO
The answer is NO
For Ballon D’or, as mentioned earlier, I think it’s more of a case of he “could have” instead of he “would have”. Panel of jury in 2016 are never the same for the retrospective one, they don’t get to watch every live games back in 60s to vote fairly and decide the true winner. Its more or less just an honorable mentioned from the magazine editors, although they could be very right that he deserved winning those.
Regional league arguments has always been there in past many years.There were absolutely some top opponents there so it wasn’t meant to belittle his achievements. But one can’t deny the fact that there could have been some dogshite opponents around his region too. As regional league, by definition, is regional. You get to against your best neighbors, you also get to play against your dogshite neighbours.
For some reason watching these old vids of the greats almost always leaves me disappointed. Maybe it's the ball or the pitch or the frames per second. I don't know.
If I had to watch a highlight reel of most players post-2000 they'd look like superstars compared to the best of all time. So strange.
If I had to watch a highlight reel of most players post-2000 they'd look like superstars compared to the best of all time. So strange.
I think the weight of the ball plus the boots makes a world of difference.
Everyone's overrated and underrated in the stats nerd era
Overrated cancels out underrated. So your sentence will read: Everyone's in the stats nerd era.
Sounds legit
In terms of stats and highlight footage Pelé knocks it out of the park though.
Being both overrated and underrated you mean? If yes, then I agree. If you meant he is statistically the greatest ever and has the greatest highlights footage, then I don't agree
Just occurred to me that another reason why highlight footage doesn't do the greats justice is because every game wasn't filmed.
But a regional league in a huge country as Brazil is as big as the country of Spain, probably bigger (just guessing here) don't forget that the Carioca and Paulista regional leagues even have a 2nd and 3rd tier. You could actually relegate, there are that many teams in Brazil. Of course they sometimes won with huge scores but they were the best team of the country. Messi under Pep had various high scoring games too but I hear nobody say that the Spanish league has some dogshite opponents.
I also see nobody going back to diminish Cruyff performances while he played in a league with just 2 good opponents, the rest was most likely of a slightly lesser level than those teams of the Paulista league (Feyenoord and PSV). Same goes for Eusebio who probably played in an even worse league than Holland. I'm not going to dismiss their performances though. They proved it on the big occasions just like Pele did.
I find it incredibly lazy to downplay Pele's performances, it should be celebrated, it was monumental. There are the big 3 Pele, Maradona and Messi and then there is the rest, it is as simple as that for me.
The only true difference between then and now is that attacking came first and defending came later because overall most teams in a league scored more goals than they do now. This doesn't necessarily mean the defenders then were worse, they just had less protection.
I can talk about this for hours it doesn't change a thing, some people refuse to see the facts. He won it all numerous times and his goal scoring records have stood for a very very long time. If that still isn't enough then watch the dozens of hours of footage on YouTube, I'm amazed every time I watch a Pele video.
One final thing the Brazil team was big no doubt but don't forget that even they got knocked out first round in 1966. This means there was definitely competition for those guys, they didn't just steamroll everyone. They barely beat Wales 1-0 in 1958, says enough.
I have to challenge this again against my better judgment because you still don't understand what you are talking about. There is no 'regional league' argument unless you have no knowledge and are trying to make conclusions about the 1960s using today's parameters.
But first, I want to make clear what your argument is. Are you saying that the state leagues were not strong by the standards of 1960s football? If so, that is demonstrably false and I can easily debunk that nonsense.
If you are saying that Pele's club careee is not as good aa say Messi's, because Messi played in a national league and Pele played in a state league then that is also ridiculous because there are a hundred differences between club football then and now wbich make a direct comparison difficult.
But what i would say about that is that Pele did not have the advantage of playing in a team which cost more to assemvle than the rest of the teams in his league combined, which is actually the case when you play for Barca or Madrid or PSG in the modern game. Pele operated on a much more level playing field.
Last edited:
Thank you for speaking sense. And you are right, Sao Paulo state is a big as Spain the country.
People say that la liga had dogshit opponents all the time. Not that I necessarily agree, just that mainly fans of the guy do all the time. Messi though scored most of his goals vs the top 6 though.
I don’t think size of nations is valid arguments anyway, otherwise bigger size nations would always win the WC and has the best league in this world, but that’s nowhere near the case in reality.
Whereas La Liga comparison is abit off IMO, as Europeans league in modern era often attracts all the top players around the globe due to the money factor, that’s definitely not the case back in Brazil regional league during 60s.
But don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to downplay his performance/achievements or anything. Believe it or not, he has always been my top 1-2 GOAT. I watched many of his footage and was very impressed that I believe he was well ahead of his time.
But I am also aware of the fact he might have been stat padding abit due to the fact that Brazil league was in regional league format back in his time. If it was in national league format, I wouldn’t put forward such argument in first place, as Brazil definitely had the many of the best players in the world at the time.
It’s just for sake of discussion in thread that I raised this point. Although some poster might have misunderstood my intention earlier and taken it the wrong way.
If you play for Barca or Madrid then Elche or whoever is a dogahit opponent. Your squad cost a billion, their squad cost 50 million or whatever. The Santos squad didn't cost 900 million more than Comercial or whoever they were playing in the Paulista. It's the best players from your area against the best players from their area. Which is what club football used to be, all over the world
If the bloke was 22 and playing now on these carpet like pitches and lighter footballs, he would leave everybody and I mean everybody in his wake. Messi, Ronaldo, Haaland wouldn’t get close to him.
I understand what you have been saying, and I am not trying to say winning the Brazil regional league is easier than winning than La Liga during Messi time, as it’s clearly challenging back then when you have to beat those 5 or 6 top class opponents you’ve mentioned there, to win the trophy.
But large part of Pele’s legacy is also build upon goals, his 1000+ goals. Of course there were many modern day jokes about him counting his friendlies goals too, but that’s not what I am trying to bring up here.
And I am not going to pretend I fully understand the context back then, but I have been hearing alot of arguments over the years on regional league thing. It seems to me although he has been playing against some top opponents there, but he has also against some “lesser opponents” in his region too, hence the stat padding. I have yet to come across some convincing arguments to refute on this, not that’s it’s important, as I don’t think it really matter as he has clearly reached GOAT status throughout his career.
He's the greatest, but that's quite a leap.
Haaland definitely is. Not the other 2.
The Bulgarians gave Pele all kinds of stick. He missed the next game against Hungary but came back against the Portuguese. It was hard to watch. Pele hobbled up and down the touchline in obvious pain and the ref did nothing to protect him.
Bigger nations DO always win the World Cup FFS. The only small nation to ever win it is Uruguay, 70 and 90 years ago, when a lot of nations didn't even compete because it took weeks and months to sail from one continent to another.
Exacrly. By 1960s standards, the Brazilian systen was as strong as anywhere else
you are though
I dont believe it actully
Guess what, the Paulista itself had many of the best players in the world at the time. Pele, Nilton Santos, Garrincha, Nilton Santos, Didi, Djalms Santos, Zito, Coutinho, Pepe, Bellini, Vava, Zagallo, Amarildo, etc etc. Which league can you name in the 60s that had more great players?
I fundamentally disagree with the point you are trying to raise because IMO it ignores the context of the time in that country. He wasn't 'stat padding' in the slightest and whilst it might not be your intention to downgrade his career, that is effectively what you are doing
Very sad, but what great memories you must have. I appreciate you sharing them.
Best was a magician. A wonderful player who could turn top defenders inside out with a twist of his hips. Bobby was the complete player. He didn't have the flair or panache of Best, or the quicksilver reactions in the penalty area as Law, but Bobby always seemed to be two steps ahead of everyone else on the pitch. Could shoot with both feet, dribble, and pass the ball over distance with unerring accuracy. I only saw Pele play in two games so I really can't compare but from the little I did see of him against the Bulgarians, he was something very special.
I don't think it does matter. As I've said, the current top guys have contextually easy games against poor opponents as well, for club and country. There might be an argumen if Pele was good against bad teams and bad against good teams, but he was the same against everybody. So he basically 'statpadded' against everyone, for club and country.
Meanwhile Messi and Ronaldo's goal ratios go down significantly when they don't have club superteams around them.
I don’t see why acknowledging the possibility of stat padding abit at Brazil league system back then equals to downplaying his achievements/performance. It’s like saying if you don’t lick his shoes at every aspect you are disrespecting this man.Bigger nations DO always win the World Cup FFS. The only small nation to ever win it is Uruguay, 70 and 90 years ago, when a lot of nations didn't even compete because it took weeks and months to sail from one continent to another.
Exacrly. By 1960s standards, the Brazilian systen was as strong as anywhere else
you are though
I dont believe it actully
Guess what, the Paulista itself had many of the best players in the world at the time. Pele, Nilton Santos, Garrincha, Nilton Santos, Didi, Djalms Santos, Zito, Coutinho, Pepe, Bellini, Vava, Zagallo, Amarildo, etc etc. Which league can you name in the 60s that had more great players?
I fundamentally disagree with the point you are trying to raise because IMO it ignores the context of the time in that country. He wasn't 'stat padding' in the slightest and whilst it might not be your intention to downgrade his career, that is effectively what you are doing
But anyway, since you have already made your mind up that I am in bad intention here, there’s not much room left for me to explain more. But I do appreciate some of your effort in explaining this out, indeed there are some helping insight throughout this conversation which helps giving some better perspective on the context at that time, especially those from @wangyu. But some of you have to also understand not everyone here has the chance to live through those era to witness his football, hence the discussion. Anyway that’s all I am looking for here.
Yeh I get that bit, never have any doubt on that. It’s similar to Haaland scoring goals at all levels, not the best example as he isn’t at same level yet, but that’s the best reference I could think of from most recent example.
No, I think that's a decent comparison to be fair to you.
Extra info to enlarge Pele's status.
In Pele's career at Santos 1957-1972 he won the Paulista league 9 times out of 16. So there were still 6 other teams that managed to win it which proves it was not a 1 team league (Palmeiras 4 timed and Sao Paulo twice).
In the 15 years prior to Peles debut in 1957 Santos only won it twice.
In the 15 years post Pele from 1972 onwards Santos won the championship only three times. So the biggest years in this 45 years of club history Santos with Pele completely outclassed Santos without Pele.
In the overall statistics we see that Corinthians is the record champion with 30 titles, Palmeiras 24, Sao Paulo 23 and Santos 22. So all 4 teams are historically evenly matched. There are also other teams who won it post WW2 like Portuguesa, Ituano (twice), Sao Caetano, Inter Limeira and Bragantino.
As far as goals go. Pele was topscorer 10 times in 16 seasons. So also in this aspect he had competition from other great strikers.
In Pele's career at Santos 1957-1972 he won the Paulista league 9 times out of 16. So there were still 6 other teams that managed to win it which proves it was not a 1 team league (Palmeiras 4 timed and Sao Paulo twice).
In the 15 years prior to Peles debut in 1957 Santos only won it twice.
In the 15 years post Pele from 1972 onwards Santos won the championship only three times. So the biggest years in this 45 years of club history Santos with Pele completely outclassed Santos without Pele.
In the overall statistics we see that Corinthians is the record champion with 30 titles, Palmeiras 24, Sao Paulo 23 and Santos 22. So all 4 teams are historically evenly matched. There are also other teams who won it post WW2 like Portuguesa, Ituano (twice), Sao Caetano, Inter Limeira and Bragantino.
As far as goals go. Pele was topscorer 10 times in 16 seasons. So also in this aspect he had competition from other great strikers.
Cristiano Ronaldo fanboy @RedRonaldo vs Pele fanboy @Andrade .
Great info. Yes, several legendary clubs in that league
Different eras.
CR7 in the 60s wouldn't have six pack, PEDs, and all the other legal doping of modern medicine.
Now imagine Pele using PEDs and all sort of modern medicine to enhance his physicality, combined with his talent.
Of course he is overrated. Best player of his generation and obviously one of the best of all time. But when I grew up he was just accepted as best player ever.
I think he’s firmly behind Maradona, Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo now. There’s also an allowed argument that Ronaldo is the best Brazilian of all time. Some would argue Ronaldinho is second.
People now more easily accept that he wasn’t godly. He was a world class player in an era that only saw the best players across the globe once every four years. He excelled and shone in those moments.
But, point blank, he’s Easily trumped by Maradona now. And Maradona is challenged by so many others.
I think he’s firmly behind Maradona, Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo now. There’s also an allowed argument that Ronaldo is the best Brazilian of all time. Some would argue Ronaldinho is second.
People now more easily accept that he wasn’t godly. He was a world class player in an era that only saw the best players across the globe once every four years. He excelled and shone in those moments.
But, point blank, he’s Easily trumped by Maradona now. And Maradona is challenged by so many others.
Everything you've written here is wrong
The best of earlier time period would excel in any time period. Talent and work ethic.
Only a 90s fanboy of R9 would put him even in same level as Pele, let alone better than him. Any educated football fan knows that Ronaldo isn't even the undisputed top 3 Brazilian of all time. Pele, Garrincha and Zico are mostly considered greater players. Many Brazilians would have Romario over Ronaldo. Ronaldo is overhyped by Europeans.
Maradona is consider greater than Pele by his cult. It is similar to the Cristiano fan cult trying hard to make it like he is greater than Messi. While by prime, peak, longevity or career wise, Pele was better than Maradona. Pele was a elite class goal scorer, dribbler and playmaker. Maradona while a top class goal scorer wasn't in the same level in goal scoring. Both played basically the same type of role, a second striker converted to playmaker, kinda like Messi who went from winger to false 9 to playmaker, yet Messi and Pele dominated all three aspects goals scoring, dribbling and playmaking, unlike Maradona who was never same as other two when it came to goal scoring.
Pele wasn't considered GOAT just because of his world cup exploits but also his domination of world football with Santos FC. Santos in early 60s were basically Barcelona of Pep, with Pele being their Messi.
A bit off-topic but the bolded is a common myth - the weight of a ball hasn't changed for nearly a century, and even just barely since the 1900s and the first official rules of football.
Materials and aerodynamics have changed a lot though.
Add in that Pele was arguably the worlds first true global footballing superstar. When I was a kid the two biggest sports stars in the world were Ali and Pele. They sat there alone at the top. Even Americans knew exactly who Pele was. His impact in terms of history and influence on the game on the global stage is huge. The sad thing as generations die out the impact of players such as Pele gets diluted. People are no longer around who remember just how huge a figure in football he was. Im not saying he was the greatest ever but the effort being put in to try and minimise his ability and position in football is sad to see.