Yep. The state of this thread.Scholes, Giggs, Schmeichel being mentioned
Most overrated ex Manchester United players
- Thread starter Scottynaldinho
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
Let's say that my main difference with your view, it's that I think that there are way more than just 3 or 4 that can play for any team at any given moment that are trully class players. So that's why I think World Class normally ends on dennying such label to trully outstanding fellas.
And in many ways such denny it's not few times due to particular circumstances like some of the ones you've mentioned.
In fact back to Macherano as an example, but this time regarding Barcelona, in his prime he was an absolute beast of a defensive focus DM with good feet. Yet in that Barca, with a very Barca approach he wasn't going to be sellected for the middle of the park.
On the other hand, he was used as bizarre as it was as a CB, because that Barca team preffererd a mid minded player in such role instead of a classic CB and it worked wonders for them, while him even not being among the best pure CBs on the planet ended being (in my view) world class during that tenure by doing his asked task in great form.
At the end of the day for me World Class it's a cool label to congratulate a special player, a very talented one, but I do not see it as such an special or even taxative term as many people does.
In any case it's just arbitrary and subjective, like when I might classify players from Genius, to Phenom, to Cracks, Elite and lately very good players...it's arbitrary, it's my very own sellection of what I feel handy to qualify them in a very subjective manner.
You can’t be overrated if you’re not rated by many. This is a subjective topic, what is the point if we’re not allowed to state our opinion?
Like I said, Scholes was a wonderful footballer. But he was a rotating shadow striker in his early twenties, was then rotated with Butt after becoming a midfielder before being moved to a new position again to make room for Veron. He was then hit by the eye problem that hampered him for a couple of years. All in all, until he settled into the quarterback position we all associate him with at 30, his career, while impressive, wasn’t that spectacular. He was, however, spectacular in the quarterback position, though his waning leg work and questionable tackles still made us somewhat vulnerable and static (remember slow-motion zombie passing?). He also never really performed for England (partly due to being played out of position but still). So when I see United fans mentioning him as a top-10/20 all-time player or suggest that he was head and shoulders above Gerrard or Lampard (he wasn’t), then yes, I think that’s overrating him.
Last edited:
I think it's the fairest definition.
You have to have some limit but with flexibility.
Mascherano was definitely world class. I remember one World Cup he was brilliant in his usual position.
Busquets was world class but I wonder how he would've performed for Stoke for example. He was excellent in a specific system.
Fergie said he only managed 4 world class players: Cantona, Giggs, Ronaldo and Scholes.
So his definition is very strict.
You could name at least 10 more players than that: Schmeichal, Irwin, Robson, Rio, Vidic, Evra, Keane, Becks, McGrath, Rooney, Stam.
Last edited:
Valencia, Herrera and Felaini
Well what Fergie said it's precisly the reason why I think it usually ends being a silly label, when even people as huge as him says sthg like that, we know that it ends being most of times a silly term.
I think he deliberately omitted Keane and Rooney and Stam to stick the knife in.
Yeah for sure and others too..yet it happens regularly with this world class label.
I don't see anyone stopping you from stating your opinion. People are free to disagree with your or my opinions.
Yet no-one is actually engaging in any sort of argument (even you now despite my lengthy reply), resorting instead to laughing emojis and condescension. Great discussion.
Very unpopular two from me, but I think both Park and Fletcher have gained way more status over time.
As someone that was way too into United at the time, Fletcher wasn't a good enough replacement for Keane/Scholes and imo wasn't even quite as good as Butt. The biggest increase in his standing came when he was (incorrectly) sent off in the CL semi-final, and was then given the Hargreaves treatment (incredible as long as he doesn't play). He had one good season imo, the rest of the time was building up to maybe being good enough, and then sadly got ill and never got back to it.
Park was often played in attacking three and offered disasterously little goal threat. I million years ago I sadly worked out that our rate of dropping points was 3x higher when he was in the starting XI - at a time when we didn't drop many points. He absolutely had his uses, but that's what they were - specific use cases. His productivity was never good enough for a starter at a top team.
Now, both would be immediate starters in our current XI, but that's hardly a high bar for the 8th best team in England
As someone that was way too into United at the time, Fletcher wasn't a good enough replacement for Keane/Scholes and imo wasn't even quite as good as Butt. The biggest increase in his standing came when he was (incorrectly) sent off in the CL semi-final, and was then given the Hargreaves treatment (incredible as long as he doesn't play). He had one good season imo, the rest of the time was building up to maybe being good enough, and then sadly got ill and never got back to it.
Park was often played in attacking three and offered disasterously little goal threat. I million years ago I sadly worked out that our rate of dropping points was 3x higher when he was in the starting XI - at a time when we didn't drop many points. He absolutely had his uses, but that's what they were - specific use cases. His productivity was never good enough for a starter at a top team.
Now, both would be immediate starters in our current XI, but that's hardly a high bar for the 8th best team in England
Tbf, I can see how you don't like either, since they have similarities in their profile. Personally I think both were great.
However, I share the same opinion when discussing players such as Iniesta (excellent but nowhere near Xavi), Bernardo Silva, Isco, Pedri, Foden, and Mata. Their influence has always seemed exaggerated to me. Xavi was the one taking significant risks in midfield, making the proper movements, turning and directing play (together with Busquets), while Iniesta supported them by continuously providing an outlet and using his superb touch and agility to retain the ball in possession. Iniesta was unquestionably outstanding at what he did. What I question is the impact of his role. I also have question marks on the flexibility of these players in different systems.
Having said all of that, I believe David Silva was excellent. I honestly feel that many English viewers were unaware of the shift in playing style that occurred with Pep's ascension. This meant they struggled to understand these new playmakers and the significant disparities in their styles. This meant that, having seen how spectacular David Silva was at City, they painted these miniature playmakers with the same brush and imagined they played in a similar style. David Silva was active in advancing the game's tempo, whilst the others named above were passive players who provided support but were presented as if they were the main characters. This was why United were so shocked with Mata's lack of impact.
Very unpopular two from me, but I think both Park and Fletcher have gained way more status over time.
As someone that was way too into United at the time, Fletcher wasn't a good enough replacement for Keane/Scholes and imo wasn't even quite as good as Butt. The biggest increase in his standing came when he was (incorrectly) sent off in the CL semi-final, and was then given the Hargreaves treatment (incredible as long as he doesn't play). He had one good season imo, the rest of the time was building up to maybe being good enough, and then sadly got ill and never got back to it.
Park was often played in attacking three and offered disasterously little goal threat. I million years ago I sadly worked out that our rate of dropping points was 3x higher when he was in the starting XI - at a time when we didn't drop many points. He absolutely had his uses, but that's what they were - specific use cases. His productivity was never good enough for a starter at a top team.
Now, both would be immediate starters in our current XI, but that's hardly a high bar for the 8th best team in England
The thing with Fletcher was that he was improving every year and then just as he was hitting his peak, he was struck down with illness.
Gary Neville would be up there as an overrated player over time. Ok defender - unless he was up against somebody really good, like Figo or Rivado. Almost no goals. Only learnt to cross the ball around 2002.
Tom Cleverly and Alan Smith. Both horrendous players with large reputations.
Andy Cole was also never good enough. When Ruud came, we saw how much better a great striker is. If we had have gotten Shearer instead of Cole, i reckon we'd have more champions leagues.
Tom Cleverly and Alan Smith. Both horrendous players with large reputations.
Andy Cole was also never good enough. When Ruud came, we saw how much better a great striker is. If we had have gotten Shearer instead of Cole, i reckon we'd have more champions leagues.
Agreed. As a result, I think he is hugely underrated by even knowledgeable United fans.
For a few years he could accurately be described as a squad player who came in, did the dirty stuff, put in the hard yards, but lacked quality. And that was a fair assessment. However, he then had an 18 month period where it all clicked, he added composure, skill and intelligence to his game. He was dominating matches, both physically and technically. He was deservedly picked in the PL Team of the Year. He was approaching his peak. And then his illness struck. It wasn't publicly announced originally. His performances dropped. Fans wrote him off, suggesting his good form was a freak purple patch and that he was now regressing to the norm, not realising the extent of the illness he was suffering.
If it weren't for that illness, he would be rated amongst our greatest centre midfielders.
There was a period in 2009 that Fletcher was the first name in the sheet.
Our eyes had to endure a lot till he could become a good player. So watching him becoming not just a good player but a magnificent one, when pretty much everyone had set his bar as a decent squad player, was such a joy. He was over achieving the expectations. Unfortunately, that didn't last long due to illness.
Anyway, regarding OPs question: Luke Shaw (in few years), Park, Neville, Valencia and DDG.
Our eyes had to endure a lot till he could become a good player. So watching him becoming not just a good player but a magnificent one, when pretty much everyone had set his bar as a decent squad player, was such a joy. He was over achieving the expectations. Unfortunately, that didn't last long due to illness.
Anyway, regarding OPs question: Luke Shaw (in few years), Park, Neville, Valencia and DDG.
Which one?
Gary. If anything Phil is a bit underrated.
Great post! I remember it all clicking in UCL games around 09-10 season, his passing came along very well, and mixed with his energy, and even heading ability.
We will never know how good he could have become and is actually a slight question mark.
Nah Gary is criminally underrated nowadays 100%.
Alan smith
Forlan
Anthony martial
Forlan
Anthony martial
has to be CR 2.0. So much hype, couldn't score goal, couldn't run, no assist / team work, only complaint.
Away to Atlanta in Champions League.
Henrik Larsson loan spell with Utd: 1PL goal in 7 PL starts!
Great player elsewhere but surely his loan spell has been overrated owing to his achievements at Barca/Celtic?
Last edited:
Stam was the best CB SAF ever had
Nothing to do with him mainly starting against the bigger teams I’m sure.Very unpopular two from me, but I think both Park and Fletcher have gained way more status over time.
As someone that was way too into United at the time, Fletcher wasn't a good enough replacement for Keane/Scholes and imo wasn't even quite as good as Butt. The biggest increase in his standing came when he was (incorrectly) sent off in the CL semi-final, and was then given the Hargreaves treatment (incredible as long as he doesn't play). He had one good season imo, the rest of the time was building up to maybe being good enough, and then sadly got ill and never got back to it.
Park was often played in attacking three and offered disasterously little goal threat. I million years ago I sadly worked out that our rate of dropping points was 3x higher when he was in the starting XI - at a time when we didn't drop many points. He absolutely had his uses, but that's what they were - specific use cases. His productivity was never good enough for a starter at a top team.
Now, both would be immediate starters in our current XI, but that's hardly a high bar for the 8th best team in England
I always think of Park when i think of over-rated ex players.
People today seem to talk of him as some unsung hero.... and I get it, his work rate and role in a counter attack system work well for us, particularly in games at the Emirates or when we were the underdogs.
However, we were only underdogs in like 5% of our games so most of the time I used to cringe when I saw his name on the team sheet at the expense of players like Nani.
My memory of Park was that he got stuck in a lot, but that was because his 1st touch always seemed to force his 2nd touch to be a tackle.
People today seem to talk of him as some unsung hero.... and I get it, his work rate and role in a counter attack system work well for us, particularly in games at the Emirates or when we were the underdogs.
However, we were only underdogs in like 5% of our games so most of the time I used to cringe when I saw his name on the team sheet at the expense of players like Nani.
My memory of Park was that he got stuck in a lot, but that was because his 1st touch always seemed to force his 2nd touch to be a tackle.
It's his own damn fault for constantly talking up how crap he was.
Young people who didn't see either probably just assume Micah Richards was a better player due to the attitudes of each towards their own careers.
Park is a good shout.
I think it was a mistake that he started both UCL finals vs Barcelona. He was a good player, but he had his limitations.
Herrera would be my pick for players post-SAF.
I think it was a mistake that he started both UCL finals vs Barcelona. He was a good player, but he had his limitations.
Herrera would be my pick for players post-SAF.
Since some our best players have been mentioned.... I'll have a go.
Bobby Charlton, Best, Law and Robson.
Bobby Charlton, Best, Law and Robson.
Endrick would like to have a word with you
Yup. I hate how negative Gary is about his playing career.
DDG:
Excellent reflexive shot stopper, but embarrassingly bad in defending his box, claiming crosses, coming out to sweep, saving any penalties, or distributing in possession.
Many of those were covered up for because much of his time here was spent playing in teams that were on the back foot or played deep lines so he did t HAVE to constantly do the aforementioned and could concentrate on the Hollywood saves, but many here thought he was the greatest keeper in our history at one point.
I’ll also add Rashford. Brilliant young talent, got plenty of experience and seemed to finally be taking the next step in 19/20 pre-back injury, but he’s largely been an inefficient shot happy winger who offers very little off the ball and never really “got better” it felt past a certain point. For someone that many until recently regarded as a cornerstone of the club, I’d say that reputation was a bit unwarranted and built more so on the HOPE that he would become that player as well as the reputation boost that comes with his penchant for huge game goals (he’s always been great in that aspect). Looking back now it feels like that 22/23 season was a bit of a mirage where his conversion rate as a finisher went through the roof (seriously, he was scoring everything) and gave everyone hope that he’d finally turned the corner, but in reality his underlying numbers weren’t even as good as they were in some of his more inconsistent young seasons.
Excellent reflexive shot stopper, but embarrassingly bad in defending his box, claiming crosses, coming out to sweep, saving any penalties, or distributing in possession.
Many of those were covered up for because much of his time here was spent playing in teams that were on the back foot or played deep lines so he did t HAVE to constantly do the aforementioned and could concentrate on the Hollywood saves, but many here thought he was the greatest keeper in our history at one point.
I’ll also add Rashford. Brilliant young talent, got plenty of experience and seemed to finally be taking the next step in 19/20 pre-back injury, but he’s largely been an inefficient shot happy winger who offers very little off the ball and never really “got better” it felt past a certain point. For someone that many until recently regarded as a cornerstone of the club, I’d say that reputation was a bit unwarranted and built more so on the HOPE that he would become that player as well as the reputation boost that comes with his penchant for huge game goals (he’s always been great in that aspect). Looking back now it feels like that 22/23 season was a bit of a mirage where his conversion rate as a finisher went through the roof (seriously, he was scoring everything) and gave everyone hope that he’d finally turned the corner, but in reality his underlying numbers weren’t even as good as they were in some of his more inconsistent young seasons.
Has anybody mentioned McTominay already? Too soon?
Thought about it but wasn’t sure it fit.
Some of the names mentioned here are fecking painful. Stam scholes Cole Ruud Gazza Nev
Seems to be to cool thing to claim Gary Neville was overrated which is criminal. Not just a great defender who played with his heart but he was actually a very good crosser of the ball as well. He had limited attributes but he made up for it with hard work and dedication.
Herrera was very overrated but he was a player who give everything which made him a fan favourite.
The two I think time at United it’s slightly overrated are Dwight Yorke and RVP. Dwight Yorke was unreal in treble season (yes enough to make you a legend) but seemed to just tail off after due to his private life and fitness etc.
RVPs 20 season was special wouldn’t have won the league (again probably enough to make him a legend) with out him but with Fergie leaving and his fitness issues that was basically it.
Shoot me
Seems to be to cool thing to claim Gary Neville was overrated which is criminal. Not just a great defender who played with his heart but he was actually a very good crosser of the ball as well. He had limited attributes but he made up for it with hard work and dedication.
Herrera was very overrated but he was a player who give everything which made him a fan favourite.
The two I think time at United it’s slightly overrated are Dwight Yorke and RVP. Dwight Yorke was unreal in treble season (yes enough to make you a legend) but seemed to just tail off after due to his private life and fitness etc.
RVPs 20 season was special wouldn’t have won the league (again probably enough to make him a legend) with out him but with Fergie leaving and his fitness issues that was basically it.
Shoot me
Other than Vidic, I've never known a player who's entire reputation who has been defined by one mistake.
He let the ball bounce instead of heading it and got robbed once.
What else is there? I'd love you to list all these other times he was "humiliated" by Torres?
Agree. Didn't Torres only score three goals against us? one was the Vidic mistake which everyone knows. One was a sprint against an injured Rio Ferdinand and the other was a very good header where he got between both defenders and in a game Liverpool lost.
I am surprised to see names like Park or Fletcher. I mean when have they ever been rated that highly for them to be overrated? I mean I thought the praise they get was always from the point of view that you need these grafters who sacrifice themselves for the team and can come in and do a specific job when needed, surely someone of that profile can't possibly be overrated? Maybe the argument is that their contribution has been underrated or players of that profile in general but I just can't see how anyone who was never an automatic starter or would make literally zero Fergie all time 11 or even second 11 for that matter, can be overrated.
The term 'overrated' seems to mean different things to different people.
The way I see it, it is possible (technically/linguistically/what have you) to both be brilliant and overrated.
Though he's my favorite player ever, I can understand why people would say that Scholes is overrated by some of the fanbase.
It's been claimed by some fans that he was as good as Xavi, or the best English midfielder of all time. These for me are over-rations of him,
Even thought we was obviously brilliant.
This thread seems to aim more at players that were though to be very good but were actually 'not all that' in the eyes of some-
Fletch, Herrera, etc...
The way I see it, it is possible (technically/linguistically/what have you) to both be brilliant and overrated.
Though he's my favorite player ever, I can understand why people would say that Scholes is overrated by some of the fanbase.
It's been claimed by some fans that he was as good as Xavi, or the best English midfielder of all time. These for me are over-rations of him,
Even thought we was obviously brilliant.
This thread seems to aim more at players that were though to be very good but were actually 'not all that' in the eyes of some-
Fletch, Herrera, etc...